¹ú²úÊÓƵ

Should the Federal Family Education Loan (FFEL) program be mended or ended? That was the subject of debate at .

On one side was , a senior advisor at the U.S. Department of Education, who helped write the Obama administration’s plan to sunset the FFEL program and use the savings to turn the Pell Grant program by financing it entirely through mandatory funding. The recent turmoil in the financial markets, he said, has exposed the risks that the federal government takes on by relying on private lenders to make government-backed loans to students. Without federal intervention, the whole program could have collapsed. “It’s not a system that assures that the loans are actually made,” he stated.

On the other side were representatives of the student loan industry, who urged the administration to abandon the proposal, which they said would be harmful to students, and instead work with them to reform the program. “I do believe the administration is approaching this from a sincere belief that they want to do the right thing and lenders, for the most part, don’t disagree with what the administration is trying to accomplish,” said , director of the , a lobbying firm that has represented lenders. “It’s simply that we disagree with how they put it in practice.”

The industry representatives said they were trying to find “a third way,” between maintaining the status quo and ending the program. But they acknowledged the hurdles of getting all the different types of players in the FFEL program to agree on an alternative plan.

“It’s going to be very difficult to get lenders and guarantors for that matter into some kind of agreement as to what it should be, public not for profit lenders, private sector lenders and so on,” said , president and chief executive officer of the student loan guaranty agency . “It will take leadership, and I think that’s the point where it is an opportunity for the administration to take that leadership role and actually open up a dialogue.”

Shireman did not rule out considering other proposals, but he said that they would have to bring significant cost savings to the government and provide loan serving companies with the proper incentives to prevent borrowers from defaulting on their loans.

, the research director of ¹ú²úÊÓƵ’s Education Policy Program, expressed skepticism over the loan industry’s willingness to change its ways. Any serious reform would have to take Congress out of the business of setting lender subsidies, he said. Given the loan industry’s “incredible opposition” to the , he said he would be “surprised if consensus emerged from the lending community around a third way that would have them competing for the subsidies they earn from the federal government.”

Video of the event is available. A full transcript is available .