June 10, 2025 • 19 mins
US Education Secretary Linda McMahon said that Harvard and other universities could get some of the federal funding cut by the Trump administration restored if they change their policies.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:02):
Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, radio News.
Speaker 2 (00:07):
Education Secretary Linda McMahon.
Speaker 3 (00:09):
She is taking part right now in a Bloomberg Newsmaker event,
and our White House correspondent A Kayla Gardner is speaking
to her live already in progress.
Speaker 2 (00:17):
Let's dip into that conversation.
Speaker 4 (00:19):
I don't recall any particular senator or Congressman that congressomen
that have had that conversation with, but generally speaking, they
are all four being behind raising test scores, having better
performance for the students in our country. But I think
at this point I could probably honestly say that they're
(00:42):
relatively thelely divided.
Speaker 1 (00:45):
I want to talk about the headlines that we've seen
from the administration. Obviously, several different agencies have revoked billions
of dollars in funding to many private universities, including Harvard, Columbia, Cornell,
Brown Princeton, which, if any, are on track to getting
their funding back from the government.
Speaker 4 (01:04):
The first university UH that we started this process with
was Columbia m U. I visited with the then acting president,
Katrina Armstrong UH on campus at Columbia, and we basically
were starting our conversation relative to.
Speaker 5 (01:19):
Anti Semitism activities that had.
Speaker 4 (01:21):
Gone on before UH and that we're still continuing in
in some ways, though some of it worth a little better.
We that's how we began our conversation, But then we
wanted to look at other aspects of UH, you know,
the UH, the programs that they had on campus, how
they were vetting their students. Did they believe that a
(01:41):
lot of the uprisings on campus came from outside agitators
or students that were on campus. What were some of
the UH ways that they were managing.
Speaker 5 (01:51):
Those activities on campus?
Speaker 4 (01:52):
And UH, I think we have had really good, open,
honest discussions. I've now met with the current UH UH
president of Columbia UH twice and had a telephone conversation
with her. I'm sorry, I've met with her once, had
you telephone conversations with her, and I think we've made
great progress.
Speaker 5 (02:12):
Harvard's been a little more UH strident.
Speaker 4 (02:14):
They responded to our negotiation outreach with a lawsuit and
have amended that lawsuit once. Still hopeful that these things
can be resolved, you know, through negotiations, and I think
just sitting in and understanding what is really best for
students that are on campus that they can be sure
that they're in a safe learning environment when they're there
(02:38):
and not be afraid to go to class. But at
the same time, we want to make sure if tax
dollars are funding a lot of what is going on
in the universities, those universities are abiding by the laws
of the United States.
Speaker 1 (02:51):
M do the universities think that they will get their
funding back at the end of their negotiations with the administration?
Speaker 4 (02:58):
Are they saying that they are or are they asking
will they well?
Speaker 1 (03:01):
Would the administration allow them to get that funding back.
Speaker 4 (03:04):
That's part of the negotiations, of course, that we have
that are ongoing. It would be my goal that if universities, colleges,
and universities are abiding by the laws of the United
States and doing what we're expecting of them, that they
could expect to have taxpayer funded programs.
Speaker 1 (03:23):
Do you think there's a chance that President Trump leaves
the White House in three years and some of these
schools never see that funding come back.
Speaker 5 (03:30):
I would hope that's not the case. We're certainly trying
to move much more.
Speaker 4 (03:33):
Expeditiously what we've seen since we really began this effort.
You know, it was kind of a hard hammer at first,
and so we've now seen a lot of other universities
who were starting to look at their practices and their
programs and getting ahead of the curve so that they
can report back sort of self monitoring.
Speaker 5 (03:52):
Self monitoring is probably not a good way to phrase it, because.
Speaker 4 (03:55):
We couldn't allow that at first, but certainly self evaluation,
I think is a better way to say it.
Speaker 1 (04:03):
You've talked about universities potentially supplementing the funding that they've
lost with their own endowments or potentially other sources. Do
you see a future where the government no longer invest
research dollars into some of the universities that have very
large endowments.
Speaker 4 (04:18):
Well, I think, you know, our universities that do some
remarkable research m And I think if we look at
our research as for the public good, which I think
that's intended, then uh, taxpayers I believe are willing to
see them of their tax dollars, you know, support that
kind of uh, really good research, and so that I
would certainly hope that would continue at the university level.
Speaker 1 (04:39):
Okay, I wanna ask you specifically about Harvard, because no
school has seen more funding rev than Harvard University. The
president recently said Harvard is starting to behave What did
he mean by that, and is Harvard back at the
negotiating table at this point?
Speaker 4 (04:54):
Well, I, uh, I would never like to pretend to
uh say that everything that the president says that I
fully can translate for you. But I think clearly what
he's indicating is that we are I think making progress
in some of the discussions we're having, even though they
have taken a hard line. They have, for instance, replaced
(05:15):
their head of Middle East Studies. They have already put
in place some of the things that we have talked
about in our negotiations with Columbia, for instance. None of
us is suggesting that on college campuses there shouldn't be
you know, there shouldn't be discussion. There could be orderly
and nonviolent protests. I mean, college ought to be about
(05:38):
the exchange of ideas and debate and all of that,
but it has to be done peacefully. You can't have
a protest, as the I think it was the president
of MIT that I met with last week said, you know,
you can't do a protest at two o'clock in the morning.
You can't be in the halls of the library and
prevent other students from getting to the library to study.
But there are places and time appropriate for peaceful protest.
Speaker 5 (06:01):
This should be allowed, and I think we're all in
agreement with that.
Speaker 1 (06:05):
The RRS is reviewing.
Speaker 3 (06:06):
Harvard's We're listening, by the way, the Bloomberg BusinessWeek and
we are bringing you a special conversation Limberg Newsmakers conversation
with the Secretary of Education Linda Mcmanonchee speaking with our
White House correspondent Kayla Gardner.
Speaker 4 (06:21):
Large endowments fifty three billion dollars for Hartford, and that
money doesn't just sit still. It is invested, and if
it's invested well, they can expect a good return on
that investment. And so as the citizens of our country
are providing tax support for those universities that do take
federal tax dollars, then maybe some of that should come
(06:44):
back to.
Speaker 5 (06:47):
Our citizens.
Speaker 1 (06:48):
Is the administration planning more actions related to Harvard University
at this particular time.
Speaker 4 (06:54):
We're continuing with the things that we've already talked about.
One action we did take relative to Columbia m which
to make their UH creditor aware UH that they needed
to make sure that Columbia was abiding by the law
of the land because they they had had an infraction.
Speaker 5 (07:12):
It was the title six Civil rights. It's which was
our position, and that they.
Speaker 4 (07:17):
Should examine that because part of the creditor's position is
to make sure that colleges are lawful, uh, or they
can risk losing their creditation.
Speaker 1 (07:26):
Did something change in your conversations with Columbia that made
you send that letter because you have been talking so
positively about your conversations with the president with the university generally.
Speaker 4 (07:35):
I think one of the things that that made us
take another look at it is just we're looking at
accreditation in general mm uh, you know, for colleges and universities,
because there has been some complaint about that that we
need to expand the number uh that you know, when
you think about the fact that all law schools are
credited you know by the ABA, that's uh it it's
like a a real monopoly, you know in some areas.
(07:57):
There have been some times now that you could change.
Accreditors used to be bound geographically, but some uh changes
in the rules. So as we've looked at a creditors,
we wanted to make sure, Okay, let's make sure that
we are touching all the bases that are relative to UH,
how our universities need to comport themselves.
Speaker 1 (08:17):
So you think other universities accreditation status should also be
in question as well.
Speaker 4 (08:22):
I I think we accreditors have a responsibility. It's built
into what they're supposed to be doing. So we've reminded
the Columbia creditors, and I think all accreditors now will
will make sure that they are abiding by.
Speaker 5 (08:33):
The terms of their agreements.
Speaker 1 (08:34):
In that letter to Columbia, you talked about federal student aid.
Is that something that you would consider limiting for universities
broadly if you can't come to an agreement with them.
Speaker 5 (08:45):
Ask me a different way.
Speaker 1 (08:47):
I suppose do you think that the administration your department
specifically should restrict access to federal student aid for universities
if you feel like they're violating civil rights?
Speaker 4 (08:59):
Well, I think the the certainly the American citizens and
taxpayers would expect that if colleges and universities, I would
believe and I've certainly heard, if their pact taxpayer dollars
are going to those universities, UH, and that there is
student aid coming for those that we would expect that.
Speaker 5 (09:16):
They would abide by those You never wanted to buy
by the law. Mm.
Speaker 4 (09:20):
Uh and and and I think we if a university is.
Speaker 5 (09:25):
Accepting federal aid. Mm. You know, we've obviously looked at
that federal aid.
Speaker 1 (09:31):
There's been reports that consent decrees were on the table
with Columbia University. Is that accurate? Is that a tool
that you would use?
Speaker 4 (09:38):
We've uh discussed uh consent decree and uh, so our negotiations.
Speaker 5 (09:42):
Have gone, you know, back and forth. Uh. That's you know,
it's been part of the negotiations.
Speaker 1 (09:48):
What we've seen it over the past couple of weeks
has really looked like an all of government approach when
it comes to higher education, whether it's take the State
Department or HS. Can you walk us through how those
decisions are made. Are you guys coordinating with each other?
Are you speaking directly with the president before you take decisions?
Speaker 4 (10:05):
Well, the President clearly has a a stated goal and
gives direction. Uh, and we take that direction obviously. But
there are parts of it. It hasn't all come necessarily at
the same time.
Speaker 5 (10:16):
Uh.
Speaker 4 (10:17):
When there was a focus on international students and uh
should we stop international students for coming here or taking
a look at their visas and et cetera. The State
Department took on that branch of it, uh, and the
courts have reacted. I think it was UH yesterday the
court said noe, that process, you know, needs to be reversed.
We need to be allowing these students to come back in.
(10:38):
But let's we then say, okay, well, let's just make
sure we're that we're conveying to these universities and colleges
that as these students do come in, they need to
know more about their background. Because when I've asked some
of the presidents that I've talked to, do you think
that a lot of agitation that's occurred on campus or
are they Are they occurring with students who are going here?
(10:59):
Are there outside agitators who are coming in? Do you
see it happening more with foreign students than domestic students?
And so it's really important, I think, to have a
handle on that student population. And I think that's fair
and also universities a little bit aside from students Specifically,
universities are required under Section one seventeen of Higher Education
(11:21):
Act to report on the amount of foreign funding they
are receiving and where it's coming from, because we want
to make sure there's no undue influence, you know, being levered,
you know, against the United States.
Speaker 1 (11:35):
So is it best to say that agencies are making
these decisions independently or are agencies coordinating each other?
Speaker 4 (11:42):
We have coordinated. In fact, we've had a task force.
The first actions that were taken in with Columbia was
with the task force, which was GSA, HHS and the
Department of Education. We've also now brought in DOOJ as
part of the process as well. So yes, there is
a coordination with with the agency's Okay.
Speaker 1 (12:01):
You mentioned international students. The President has floated imposing a
fifteen percent cap on international students, specifically talking about Harvard University,
but I suppose he could mean all universities. How would
something like that work.
Speaker 4 (12:16):
I'm not quite sure, but clearly, but Harvard's foreign population
right now said about twenty seven percent. And we just
want to make sure that I I I think the
President just wants to make sure that we're looking at
m that making sure that UH students in the United
States aren't penalized by allowing too many international students, you know,
(12:39):
to come in. And so what is that right balance?
I'm not sure what it is, but the President certainly
floated fifteen percent. So let's see as we discussed that
investigated how that plays out.
Speaker 1 (12:49):
You're a former CEO, you came from the business world.
Do you worry that less international students could make American
companies less competitive?
Speaker 4 (12:58):
I I think there is so merit and having international
students be part of our university population as I as
I mentioned earlier, or I might not have mentioned in
this interview, but as we were talking earlier, I served
on the board of University in Connecticut Secretary University for
sixteen years. So I know that having international students on
(13:19):
campus does does help with that cultural exchange. And uh,
we actually had a campus in Ireland. Uh from a
sacred heart, So I I really understand that exchange and
how culturally it's very beneficial. So I wanna make sure
that we don't lose that. I think that's important for
us to have. But on the same time, Uh, if
you think about just last week when it was discovered
(13:41):
in the backpack of a a research student at the
University of Michigan, these fungus spores that were intended to
be utilized against our agricultural products, those are the kinds
of things that we have to make sure that we
are on guard against UH and whether whether that would
be students with this country, But most of the time,
I think that would have the provincity at least to
(14:03):
come in internationally that could destroy your crops in America. I
heard from the Department, from the Secretary of Agriculture when
she was saying, you know that these things are so
dangerous because America feeds not only ourselves, but we feed
the world. And if we are looking to destroy or
(14:23):
we can our crop production here, it's not only for
our food, for our health, but it's also.
Speaker 5 (14:29):
Our national defense. So those kinds of measures.
Speaker 4 (14:32):
I think we have to be very very specific and
sure about.
Speaker 1 (14:36):
You previously led this.
Speaker 2 (14:38):
This is Bloomberg Business Week.
Speaker 1 (14:39):
For those just tuning in, we're listening right now.
Speaker 2 (14:41):
To US Secretary of Education Linda McMahon.
Speaker 1 (14:43):
She's taking part in a Bloomberg Newsmaker event with our
White House correspondent like Kayla Gardners.
Speaker 2 (14:49):
We'll get back to them right now.
Speaker 4 (14:50):
As we first started to talk about dismantly the department,
what functions would go perhaps to which agencies? He had
asked about SBA, also about Treasury, We've talked about HHS,
perhaps looking at the IDA program, But all of that
is still part of discussion. It's not an assignment in
any way, except that Treasury has taken back over the
(15:14):
collection of student loans, as it always has done served
in that capacity, So that's not new relative to Treasury.
Speaker 1 (15:24):
The Reconciliation Bill has a lot of changes to federal
student aid, and one provision in particular, ask you to
basically place a cap on the amount of loans that
people can borrow based on the program that they're choosing.
Have you started to calculate what it would cost to
have a psychology degree or an engineering degree.
Speaker 4 (15:47):
I've not actually started that process yet, except in conversations.
I know that Congress had started a lot of that
kind of work and had done some research relative to
what the mean cost was across country to take different
courses and should lending kind of be based on that
media or that mean cost. And I think that is
(16:09):
one of the things that I think it was Representative
Fox who has worked so diligently to bring down the
cost of college of one of the things that she
talked about, And so that is something to look at,
especially for students who can graduate so overburdened by debt
and not really understanding that the profession that they have
(16:31):
chosen could never give them the account the amount of
income or at least the projected or the proven stated
amounts of income that they might receive to pay off
that loan. And part of what we are doing with
the restructuring of the FAFSA application for college is trying
to work in some language eventually that will say this
(16:54):
is what you could expect to earn relative to this
kind of degree in program. This is what this college
charge is for. This is what a different college would
charge for. Put this into your calculus as to where
you would like to go to school and have the
biggest ROI on what you're doing. I think those are
really sensible measures to be taking and how to look
(17:15):
at it, because so many students have no ideas.
Speaker 5 (17:18):
I'll tell you just a little side story.
Speaker 4 (17:19):
When I was running for the Senate in Connecticut back
in twenty ten, and I went to a freshman class
in college and I asked, I said, of all of
you are in this class, how many of you have
a student eight you know?
Speaker 5 (17:30):
Ninety five percent? Hands go up.
Speaker 4 (17:32):
I said, how many of you know how much interest
you're paying on that loan? Maybe half the hands went up.
I said, how many of you know the actual amount
of the loan? Viewer, I said, how many of you
know what kind of a job you would have to
have and how much money you'd have to make to
start repaying this loan.
Speaker 5 (17:50):
Not a single hand went up.
Speaker 4 (17:52):
So I think we need to provide students with better
tools of assessing the value of what education they and
do they need a four year college or are they
better suited for some other kinds at community college?
Speaker 5 (18:08):
Are we looking at our skill based education?
Speaker 4 (18:10):
How does technology and AI play into all of that
in their learning process? I think we kind of need
to rethink, uh, in our whole culture of how we
look at education.
Speaker 1 (18:22):
Okay, my last question before return to the audience. Would
you make those calculations public because it could affect what
major students decide to pursue.
Speaker 4 (18:30):
Oh, definitely, They'll be part of the public forum. And
I think it's a that's a that's a great thing
to share, uh with, you know, with anyone who's contemplating going,
you know, to class and going to college or university
or community college or however they decide to look at
at their career. That's I think vital information for them
(18:51):
to have and for parents.
Speaker 1 (18:54):
Okay, so we're gonna go ahead and take some questions
from the audience. If you could just raise your hand.
We just asked that people's say your name an organization
before you ask your question.
Speaker 2 (19:02):
All right, I think we will jump out. Now. You
can follow that event on live go on the Bloomberg terminal.
Speaker 3 (19:08):
L I ve go to hear more from a Secretary
of Education Linda McMahon talking with our White House correspondent
A Kayla Gardner at a Bloomberg Newsmakers event
Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, radio News.
Speaker 2 (00:07):
Education Secretary Linda McMahon.
Speaker 3 (00:09):
She is taking part right now in a Bloomberg Newsmaker event,
and our White House correspondent A Kayla Gardner is speaking
to her live already in progress.
Speaker 2 (00:17):
Let's dip into that conversation.
Speaker 4 (00:19):
I don't recall any particular senator or Congressman that congressomen
that have had that conversation with, but generally speaking, they
are all four being behind raising test scores, having better
performance for the students in our country. But I think
at this point I could probably honestly say that they're
(00:42):
relatively thelely divided.
Speaker 1 (00:45):
I want to talk about the headlines that we've seen
from the administration. Obviously, several different agencies have revoked billions
of dollars in funding to many private universities, including Harvard, Columbia, Cornell,
Brown Princeton, which, if any, are on track to getting
their funding back from the government.
Speaker 4 (01:04):
The first university UH that we started this process with
was Columbia m U. I visited with the then acting president,
Katrina Armstrong UH on campus at Columbia, and we basically
were starting our conversation relative to.
Speaker 5 (01:19):
Anti Semitism activities that had.
Speaker 4 (01:21):
Gone on before UH and that we're still continuing in
in some ways, though some of it worth a little better.
We that's how we began our conversation, But then we
wanted to look at other aspects of UH, you know,
the UH, the programs that they had on campus, how
they were vetting their students. Did they believe that a
(01:41):
lot of the uprisings on campus came from outside agitators
or students that were on campus. What were some of
the UH ways that they were managing.
Speaker 5 (01:51):
Those activities on campus?
Speaker 4 (01:52):
And UH, I think we have had really good, open,
honest discussions. I've now met with the current UH UH
president of Columbia UH twice and had a telephone conversation
with her. I'm sorry, I've met with her once, had
you telephone conversations with her, and I think we've made
great progress.
Speaker 5 (02:12):
Harvard's been a little more UH strident.
Speaker 4 (02:14):
They responded to our negotiation outreach with a lawsuit and
have amended that lawsuit once. Still hopeful that these things
can be resolved, you know, through negotiations, and I think
just sitting in and understanding what is really best for
students that are on campus that they can be sure
that they're in a safe learning environment when they're there
(02:38):
and not be afraid to go to class. But at
the same time, we want to make sure if tax
dollars are funding a lot of what is going on
in the universities, those universities are abiding by the laws
of the United States.
Speaker 1 (02:51):
M do the universities think that they will get their
funding back at the end of their negotiations with the administration?
Speaker 4 (02:58):
Are they saying that they are or are they asking
will they well?
Speaker 1 (03:01):
Would the administration allow them to get that funding back.
Speaker 4 (03:04):
That's part of the negotiations, of course, that we have
that are ongoing. It would be my goal that if universities, colleges,
and universities are abiding by the laws of the United
States and doing what we're expecting of them, that they
could expect to have taxpayer funded programs.
Speaker 1 (03:23):
Do you think there's a chance that President Trump leaves
the White House in three years and some of these
schools never see that funding come back.
Speaker 5 (03:30):
I would hope that's not the case. We're certainly trying
to move much more.
Speaker 4 (03:33):
Expeditiously what we've seen since we really began this effort.
You know, it was kind of a hard hammer at first,
and so we've now seen a lot of other universities
who were starting to look at their practices and their
programs and getting ahead of the curve so that they
can report back sort of self monitoring.
Speaker 5 (03:52):
Self monitoring is probably not a good way to phrase it, because.
Speaker 4 (03:55):
We couldn't allow that at first, but certainly self evaluation,
I think is a better way to say it.
Speaker 1 (04:03):
You've talked about universities potentially supplementing the funding that they've
lost with their own endowments or potentially other sources. Do
you see a future where the government no longer invest
research dollars into some of the universities that have very
large endowments.
Speaker 4 (04:18):
Well, I think, you know, our universities that do some
remarkable research m And I think if we look at
our research as for the public good, which I think
that's intended, then uh, taxpayers I believe are willing to
see them of their tax dollars, you know, support that
kind of uh, really good research, and so that I
would certainly hope that would continue at the university level.
Speaker 1 (04:39):
Okay, I wanna ask you specifically about Harvard, because no
school has seen more funding rev than Harvard University. The
president recently said Harvard is starting to behave What did
he mean by that, and is Harvard back at the
negotiating table at this point?
Speaker 4 (04:54):
Well, I, uh, I would never like to pretend to
uh say that everything that the president says that I
fully can translate for you. But I think clearly what
he's indicating is that we are I think making progress
in some of the discussions we're having, even though they
have taken a hard line. They have, for instance, replaced
(05:15):
their head of Middle East Studies. They have already put
in place some of the things that we have talked
about in our negotiations with Columbia, for instance. None of
us is suggesting that on college campuses there shouldn't be
you know, there shouldn't be discussion. There could be orderly
and nonviolent protests. I mean, college ought to be about
(05:38):
the exchange of ideas and debate and all of that,
but it has to be done peacefully. You can't have
a protest, as the I think it was the president
of MIT that I met with last week said, you know,
you can't do a protest at two o'clock in the morning.
You can't be in the halls of the library and
prevent other students from getting to the library to study.
But there are places and time appropriate for peaceful protest.
Speaker 5 (06:01):
This should be allowed, and I think we're all in
agreement with that.
Speaker 1 (06:05):
The RRS is reviewing.
Speaker 3 (06:06):
Harvard's We're listening, by the way, the Bloomberg BusinessWeek and
we are bringing you a special conversation Limberg Newsmakers conversation
with the Secretary of Education Linda Mcmanonchee speaking with our
White House correspondent Kayla Gardner.
Speaker 4 (06:21):
Large endowments fifty three billion dollars for Hartford, and that
money doesn't just sit still. It is invested, and if
it's invested well, they can expect a good return on
that investment. And so as the citizens of our country
are providing tax support for those universities that do take
federal tax dollars, then maybe some of that should come
(06:44):
back to.
Speaker 5 (06:47):
Our citizens.
Speaker 1 (06:48):
Is the administration planning more actions related to Harvard University
at this particular time.
Speaker 4 (06:54):
We're continuing with the things that we've already talked about.
One action we did take relative to Columbia m which
to make their UH creditor aware UH that they needed
to make sure that Columbia was abiding by the law
of the land because they they had had an infraction.
Speaker 5 (07:12):
It was the title six Civil rights. It's which was
our position, and that they.
Speaker 4 (07:17):
Should examine that because part of the creditor's position is
to make sure that colleges are lawful, uh, or they
can risk losing their creditation.
Speaker 1 (07:26):
Did something change in your conversations with Columbia that made
you send that letter because you have been talking so
positively about your conversations with the president with the university generally.
Speaker 4 (07:35):
I think one of the things that that made us
take another look at it is just we're looking at
accreditation in general mm uh, you know, for colleges and universities,
because there has been some complaint about that that we
need to expand the number uh that you know, when
you think about the fact that all law schools are
credited you know by the ABA, that's uh it it's
like a a real monopoly, you know in some areas.
(07:57):
There have been some times now that you could change.
Accreditors used to be bound geographically, but some uh changes
in the rules. So as we've looked at a creditors,
we wanted to make sure, Okay, let's make sure that
we are touching all the bases that are relative to UH,
how our universities need to comport themselves.
Speaker 1 (08:17):
So you think other universities accreditation status should also be
in question as well.
Speaker 4 (08:22):
I I think we accreditors have a responsibility. It's built
into what they're supposed to be doing. So we've reminded
the Columbia creditors, and I think all accreditors now will
will make sure that they are abiding by.
Speaker 5 (08:33):
The terms of their agreements.
Speaker 1 (08:34):
In that letter to Columbia, you talked about federal student aid.
Is that something that you would consider limiting for universities
broadly if you can't come to an agreement with them.
Speaker 5 (08:45):
Ask me a different way.
Speaker 1 (08:47):
I suppose do you think that the administration your department
specifically should restrict access to federal student aid for universities
if you feel like they're violating civil rights?
Speaker 4 (08:59):
Well, I think the the certainly the American citizens and
taxpayers would expect that if colleges and universities, I would
believe and I've certainly heard, if their pact taxpayer dollars
are going to those universities, UH, and that there is
student aid coming for those that we would expect that.
Speaker 5 (09:16):
They would abide by those You never wanted to buy
by the law. Mm.
Speaker 4 (09:20):
Uh and and and I think we if a university is.
Speaker 5 (09:25):
Accepting federal aid. Mm. You know, we've obviously looked at
that federal aid.
Speaker 1 (09:31):
There's been reports that consent decrees were on the table
with Columbia University. Is that accurate? Is that a tool
that you would use?
Speaker 4 (09:38):
We've uh discussed uh consent decree and uh, so our negotiations.
Speaker 5 (09:42):
Have gone, you know, back and forth. Uh. That's you know,
it's been part of the negotiations.
Speaker 1 (09:48):
What we've seen it over the past couple of weeks
has really looked like an all of government approach when
it comes to higher education, whether it's take the State
Department or HS. Can you walk us through how those
decisions are made. Are you guys coordinating with each other?
Are you speaking directly with the president before you take decisions?
Speaker 4 (10:05):
Well, the President clearly has a a stated goal and
gives direction. Uh, and we take that direction obviously. But
there are parts of it. It hasn't all come necessarily at
the same time.
Speaker 5 (10:16):
Uh.
Speaker 4 (10:17):
When there was a focus on international students and uh
should we stop international students for coming here or taking
a look at their visas and et cetera. The State
Department took on that branch of it, uh, and the
courts have reacted. I think it was UH yesterday the
court said noe, that process, you know, needs to be reversed.
We need to be allowing these students to come back in.
(10:38):
But let's we then say, okay, well, let's just make
sure we're that we're conveying to these universities and colleges
that as these students do come in, they need to
know more about their background. Because when I've asked some
of the presidents that I've talked to, do you think
that a lot of agitation that's occurred on campus or
are they Are they occurring with students who are going here?
(10:59):
Are there outside agitators who are coming in? Do you
see it happening more with foreign students than domestic students?
And so it's really important, I think, to have a
handle on that student population. And I think that's fair
and also universities a little bit aside from students Specifically,
universities are required under Section one seventeen of Higher Education
(11:21):
Act to report on the amount of foreign funding they
are receiving and where it's coming from, because we want
to make sure there's no undue influence, you know, being levered,
you know, against the United States.
Speaker 1 (11:35):
So is it best to say that agencies are making
these decisions independently or are agencies coordinating each other?
Speaker 4 (11:42):
We have coordinated. In fact, we've had a task force.
The first actions that were taken in with Columbia was
with the task force, which was GSA, HHS and the
Department of Education. We've also now brought in DOOJ as
part of the process as well. So yes, there is
a coordination with with the agency's Okay.
Speaker 1 (12:01):
You mentioned international students. The President has floated imposing a
fifteen percent cap on international students, specifically talking about Harvard University,
but I suppose he could mean all universities. How would
something like that work.
Speaker 4 (12:16):
I'm not quite sure, but clearly, but Harvard's foreign population
right now said about twenty seven percent. And we just
want to make sure that I I I think the
President just wants to make sure that we're looking at
m that making sure that UH students in the United
States aren't penalized by allowing too many international students, you know,
(12:39):
to come in. And so what is that right balance?
I'm not sure what it is, but the President certainly
floated fifteen percent. So let's see as we discussed that
investigated how that plays out.
Speaker 1 (12:49):
You're a former CEO, you came from the business world.
Do you worry that less international students could make American
companies less competitive?
Speaker 4 (12:58):
I I think there is so merit and having international
students be part of our university population as I as
I mentioned earlier, or I might not have mentioned in
this interview, but as we were talking earlier, I served
on the board of University in Connecticut Secretary University for
sixteen years. So I know that having international students on
(13:19):
campus does does help with that cultural exchange. And uh,
we actually had a campus in Ireland. Uh from a
sacred heart, So I I really understand that exchange and
how culturally it's very beneficial. So I wanna make sure
that we don't lose that. I think that's important for
us to have. But on the same time, Uh, if
you think about just last week when it was discovered
(13:41):
in the backpack of a a research student at the
University of Michigan, these fungus spores that were intended to
be utilized against our agricultural products, those are the kinds
of things that we have to make sure that we
are on guard against UH and whether whether that would
be students with this country, But most of the time,
I think that would have the provincity at least to
(14:03):
come in internationally that could destroy your crops in America. I
heard from the Department, from the Secretary of Agriculture when
she was saying, you know that these things are so
dangerous because America feeds not only ourselves, but we feed
the world. And if we are looking to destroy or
(14:23):
we can our crop production here, it's not only for
our food, for our health, but it's also.
Speaker 5 (14:29):
Our national defense. So those kinds of measures.
Speaker 4 (14:32):
I think we have to be very very specific and
sure about.
Speaker 1 (14:36):
You previously led this.
Speaker 2 (14:38):
This is Bloomberg Business Week.
Speaker 1 (14:39):
For those just tuning in, we're listening right now.
Speaker 2 (14:41):
To US Secretary of Education Linda McMahon.
Speaker 1 (14:43):
She's taking part in a Bloomberg Newsmaker event with our
White House correspondent like Kayla Gardners.
Speaker 2 (14:49):
We'll get back to them right now.
Speaker 4 (14:50):
As we first started to talk about dismantly the department,
what functions would go perhaps to which agencies? He had
asked about SBA, also about Treasury, We've talked about HHS,
perhaps looking at the IDA program, But all of that
is still part of discussion. It's not an assignment in
any way, except that Treasury has taken back over the
(15:14):
collection of student loans, as it always has done served
in that capacity, So that's not new relative to Treasury.
Speaker 1 (15:24):
The Reconciliation Bill has a lot of changes to federal
student aid, and one provision in particular, ask you to
basically place a cap on the amount of loans that
people can borrow based on the program that they're choosing.
Have you started to calculate what it would cost to
have a psychology degree or an engineering degree.
Speaker 4 (15:47):
I've not actually started that process yet, except in conversations.
I know that Congress had started a lot of that
kind of work and had done some research relative to
what the mean cost was across country to take different
courses and should lending kind of be based on that
media or that mean cost. And I think that is
(16:09):
one of the things that I think it was Representative
Fox who has worked so diligently to bring down the
cost of college of one of the things that she
talked about, And so that is something to look at,
especially for students who can graduate so overburdened by debt
and not really understanding that the profession that they have
(16:31):
chosen could never give them the account the amount of
income or at least the projected or the proven stated
amounts of income that they might receive to pay off
that loan. And part of what we are doing with
the restructuring of the FAFSA application for college is trying
to work in some language eventually that will say this
(16:54):
is what you could expect to earn relative to this
kind of degree in program. This is what this college
charge is for. This is what a different college would
charge for. Put this into your calculus as to where
you would like to go to school and have the
biggest ROI on what you're doing. I think those are
really sensible measures to be taking and how to look
(17:15):
at it, because so many students have no ideas.
Speaker 5 (17:18):
I'll tell you just a little side story.
Speaker 4 (17:19):
When I was running for the Senate in Connecticut back
in twenty ten, and I went to a freshman class
in college and I asked, I said, of all of
you are in this class, how many of you have
a student eight you know?
Speaker 5 (17:30):
Ninety five percent? Hands go up.
Speaker 4 (17:32):
I said, how many of you know how much interest
you're paying on that loan? Maybe half the hands went up.
I said, how many of you know the actual amount
of the loan? Viewer, I said, how many of you
know what kind of a job you would have to
have and how much money you'd have to make to
start repaying this loan.
Speaker 5 (17:50):
Not a single hand went up.
Speaker 4 (17:52):
So I think we need to provide students with better
tools of assessing the value of what education they and
do they need a four year college or are they
better suited for some other kinds at community college?
Speaker 5 (18:08):
Are we looking at our skill based education?
Speaker 4 (18:10):
How does technology and AI play into all of that
in their learning process? I think we kind of need
to rethink, uh, in our whole culture of how we
look at education.
Speaker 1 (18:22):
Okay, my last question before return to the audience. Would
you make those calculations public because it could affect what
major students decide to pursue.
Speaker 4 (18:30):
Oh, definitely, They'll be part of the public forum. And
I think it's a that's a that's a great thing
to share, uh with, you know, with anyone who's contemplating going,
you know, to class and going to college or university
or community college or however they decide to look at
at their career. That's I think vital information for them
(18:51):
to have and for parents.
Speaker 1 (18:54):
Okay, so we're gonna go ahead and take some questions
from the audience. If you could just raise your hand.
We just asked that people's say your name an organization
before you ask your question.
Speaker 2 (19:02):
All right, I think we will jump out. Now. You
can follow that event on live go on the Bloomberg terminal.
Speaker 3 (19:08):
L I ve go to hear more from a Secretary
of Education Linda McMahon talking with our White House correspondent
A Kayla Gardner at a Bloomberg Newsmakers event
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
The Breakfast Club
The World's Most Dangerous Morning Show, The Breakfast Club, With DJ Envy, Jess Hilarious, And Charlamagne Tha God!
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.