FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Scam Schools: For-Profit Education in the Time of Trump

The good news is that the DJT administration has finally come up with a plan to help businesses that does not benefit one of DJT’s enterprises and, therefore, does not represent a conflict of interest for DJT.  That comes as a welcome surprise for those who have marveled at how DJT has transformed the White House from a policy center to a profit center.

This was most recently demonstrated when the Republican National Committee selected the Trump International Hotel in Washington, to host a $10 million re-election fund raiser in that venue.  According to the hotel, the Republican National Committee that put on the event paid “regular prices” for all the services and space provided by the hotel.

That blatant conflict of interest made it all the more important to alert the public to the fact that, appearances notwithstanding, the most recent political decision made by the administration does not benefit DJT in any way.  That is because, as far as can be determined, DJT no longer has any financial interest in making money by defrauding students.  That was not always the case.

A while back, DJT was the poster child for an unethical enterprise that purported to offer training to its victims in get rich schemes. His fraud was called Trump University.  It was a complete scam.  It had no campus or classrooms.  Although it touted the qualifications of its faculty when recruiting students, its faculty lacked academic credentials, the university granted no degrees,  and most of its students discovered that promises of lucrative careers in the real estate world following completion of the program were illusory.  Because of its palpable fraudulent conduct, it was subject to a class action lawsuit from those who had paid large sums of money in exchange for nothing of value, and the lawsuit was settled, following DJT’s election, for $25 million.

Even though DJT had a different fraud model from those for-profit colleges that are run unethically, there was a great sense of relief among all for-profit colleges, the good and the bad , when DJT was elected.  The relief was palpable.  The day following DJT’s election, the stock in Strayer Education, Inc. that owns the for-profit Strayer University, jumped almost 20%.  Stock in other for-profit colleges also saw the value of their shares increase.

There was a reason for the jump in stock prices. Those institutions had reason to hope that DJT, who had run a complete scam, might have residual sympathy for for-profit colleges that were subject to regulations that were destined to go into effect on July 1, 2017.  They hoped that some of the Obama proposals that were directed at fraudulent for-profit colleges might go away or, at least, be delayed. The Trump administration did not disappoint.

Among the regulations imposed by the Obama administration that had been scheduled to be implemented on July 1, 2017, were two that were especially troubling to the for-profit colleges.  One was a proposal that would expand and speed up a system that had been created to erase the student federal loan debt incurred by students who were cheated by for-profit colleges that engaged in fraudulent conduct.

The other change was to the regulation known as the “gainful employment mandate.”  That mandate provided that for-profit colleges whose students are unable to find jobs that pay them enough to retire their student debt, may, if the pattern continues for three years, be removed from the student loan program.  (The actual rule is more complex but that description is adequate for our purposes.)

The regulations that were to take effect on July 1 were imposed after many for-profit schools collapsed before their students graduated, leaving students with no degrees and no means to repay the student loans they’d incurred to attend them. Although the regulations were needed, thanks to the actions of Betsy DeVos, the Secretary of Education, they may never become effective.

On June 14, 2017, Betsy’s Education Department announced that the proposed changes would not take place on July 1 as planned.  The department said it would form a committee to examine the proposed rule changes, and would not implement them until the review was completed.  The delay does not, however, suggest that Betsy DeVos is in favor of fraud.  She made that plain when, in commenting on the delay,  she said:  “Fraud, especially fraud committed by a school, is simply unacceptable.”

That was very reassuring.  The rest of her remarks less so.  She said the rules were produced as a “result of a muddled process that’s unfair to students and schools, and puts taxpayers on the hook for significant costs.”  What she overlooked, of course, was that the fraudulent for-profit colleges put the students “on the hook for significant costs.”

Not surprisingly, in this administration, if a choice has to be made between taking steps to help the needy, in this case students, or the taxpayer, the taxpayer wins.  So sad for the students.

More articles by:
April 24, 2018
Carl Boggs
Russia and the War Party
William A. Cohn
Carnage Unleashed: the Pentagon and the AUMF
Nathan Kalman-Lamb
The Racist Culture of Canadian Hockey
María Julia Bertomeu
On Angers, Disgusts and Nauseas
Nick Pemberton
How To Buy A Seat In Congress 101
Ron Jacobs
Resisting the Military-Now More Than Ever
Paul Bentley
A Velvet Revolution Turns Bloody? Ten Dead in Toronto
Sonali Kolhatkar
The Left, Syria and Fake News
Manuel E. Yepe
The Confirmation of Democracy in Cuba
Peter Montgomery
Christian Nationalism: Good for Politicians, Bad for America and the World
Ted Rall
Bad Drones
Jill Richardson
The Latest Attack on Food Stamps
Andrew Stewart
What Kind of Unionism is This?
Ellen Brown
Fox in the Hen House: Why Interest Rates Are Rising
April 23, 2018
Patrick Cockburn
In Middle East Wars It Pays to be Skeptical
Thomas Knapp
Just When You Thought “Russiagate” Couldn’t Get Any Sillier …
Gregory Barrett
The Moral Mask
Robert Hunziker
Chemical Madness!
David Swanson
Senator Tim Kaine’s Brief Run-In With the Law
Dave Lindorff
Starbucks Has a Racism Problem
Uri Avnery
The Great Day
Nyla Ali Khan
Girls Reduced to Being Repositories of Communal and Religious Identities in Kashmir
Ted Rall
Stop Letting Trump Distract You From Your Wants and Needs
Steve Klinger
The Cautionary Tale of Donald J. Trump
Kevin Zeese - Margaret Flowers
Conflict Over the Future of the Planet
Cesar Chelala
Gideon Levy: A Voice of Sanity from Israel
Weekend Edition
April 20, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Paul Street
Ruling Class Operatives Say the Darndest Things: On Devils Known and Not
Conn Hallinan
The Great Game Comes to Syria
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: Mother of War
Andrew Levine
“How Come?” Questions
Doug Noble
A Tale of Two Atrocities: Douma and Gaza
Kenneth Surin
The Blight of Ukania
Howard Lisnoff
How James Comey Became the Strange New Hero of the Liberals
William Blum
Anti-Empire Report: Unseen Persons
Lawrence Davidson
Missiles Over Damascus
Patrick Cockburn
The Plight of the Yazidi of Afrin
Pete Dolack
Fooled Again? Trump Trade Policy Elevates Corporate Power
Stan Cox
For Climate Mobilization, Look to 1960s Vietnam Before Turning to 1940s America
William Hawes
Global Weirding
Dan Glazebrook
World War is Still in the Cards
Nick Pemberton
In Defense of Cardi B: Beyond Bourgeois PC Culture
Ishmael Reed
Hollywood’s Last Days?
Peter Certo
There Was Nothing Humanitarian About Our Strikes on Syria
Dean Baker
China’s “Currency Devaluation Game”
Ann Garrison
Why Don’t We All Vote to Commit International Crimes?
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail