On May 19, California and 24 other states filed a lawsuit against the Department of Education’s(ED) Final Rule, which implemented the One Big Beautiful Bill(OB3) new restrictions on federal graduate financial aid. First, OB3 created new restrictions by only allowing graduate students pursuing an academic degree to collect up to $20,500 annually ($100,000 total) and graduate students pursuing a professional degree to collect up to $50,000 annually ($200,000 total). Previously, all graduate students could borrow up to the cost of attendance. Next, ED’s Final Rule illegally narrowed the definition of a “professional degree,” excluding many healthcare programs from receiving higher loans. Failure to stop the current administration’s attempt to restrict federal student loans will make higher education less affordable and amplify the healthcare shortage the U.S. already faces.
Trump’s OB3 will make it harder for UCR graduate students to attend college, as the full cost of attendance would no longer be covered. For example, regular UCR graduate students face an instate tuition of $7,080.83 a quarter ($21,162.49 annually) and graduate students pursuing an M.D. face $15,948.83 a quarter ($47846.49 annually). With the new caps, it is a near certainty that students will be forced to take out a private loan to make up for the difference in tuition and/or cost of living. This creates a serious financial burden that graduate students at UCR will have to contend with. As a result, extra work may have to be taken on in place of studying, reducing their overall academic performance and limiting their possibilities for internship opportunities. What makes this more troubling is that UCR is ranked No. 1 in social mobility. UCR is the university where low-income students go to improve their economic circumstances.
But what happens when UCR, built to improve the economic opportunities for its students, is no longer affordable?
The Trump administration defends the new financial aid caps by stating that it will force universities to lower their cost of attendance. At a House education committee hearing the Education Secretary Linda McMahon defended cutting financial aid by suggesting that it will incentivise universities to lower their graduate cost of education. There is some evidence of this working as UC Irvine has lowered its tuition by about 25% for two of its MBA programs. But what isn’t talked about is whatever else they’re cutting back on. In order to cut tuition, spending has to be reduced. That potentially could mean student resource centers, basic need programs, academic diving and other resources students need to succeed. Additionally, some programs can’t reduce their tuition, like nursing where a faculty-to-student ratio of 1:8 is required. In situations like these, it could force institutions to downsize their programs or even pass on some of the program’s costs to undergraduate students.
The medical field’s workforce shortage is expected to deepen as the restrictions on federal financial aid increase the barrier to entry. In the U.S., to become a doctor, the average cost for medical school is $229,959 and at UCLA, the cost of attendance for the first year alone is $124,342. Getting a medical degree already has high upfront costs, so many students rely on financial aid to relieve part of that burden. Therefore, this shift to reduce financial aid makes pursuing this career option near impossible, especially for those who are already not financially well off. This is especially true for professions such physicians assistant, registered nurse and physical therapist where there is relatively less pay. As a result, fewer students are likely to apply for these programs, worsening the healthcare crisis we are already in.
The restrictions OB3 presents to financial aid will create trouble for university students pursuing graduate level degrees and the US healthcare system as a whole. The increased financial burden will likely lead to overall higher student debt and price out students from lower-income backgrounds, preventing them from pursuing higher education. While supporters of OB3 will argue that limiting aid will cut tuition costs, what they fail to address is everything else OB3 will cut from students along the way, such as the academic resources graduate students depend on to succeed. Ultimately, this will intensify the shortage of personnel that healthcare institutions already face. For these reasons OB3 must be stopped.
