House Republicans proposed to diminish a federal grant for students. Campus leaders want the Senate to save it.

College presidents are rallying behind Senate Republicans in a bid to stave off megabill cuts to a program that helps more than 6 million low- and middle-income students pay for school.

To help avert a $2.7 billion shortfall in the Pell Grant program later this year, the House’s version of President Donald Trump’s “big, beautiful bill” advanced tighter eligibility rules that alarmed educators. The changes, according to the Congressional Budget Office, could kick nearly 10 percent of Pell recipients off the award and shrink the amount of money most participants receive.

Those numbers are driving college leaders — many already facing threats of Trump-driven funding cuts, new endowment taxes and limits on international students — to support the Senate’s less-restrictive take on the popular bipartisan program.

Mark Brown, a former Trump Education Department official who is now president of Alabama’s Tuskegee University, told senators last month that Pell reductions proposed by the House would push students to take out more loans. And some of the nation’s largest university systems, like California State University and California Community Colleges, have called the restrictions an “existential threat.”

“This is a difference between some of those students either coming to our universities or tech colleges or not,” said Jay Rothman, president of the Universities of Wisconsin, whose 13 campuses have roughly 31,600 Pell Grant recipients.

Republicans in both chambers are under tremendous pressure from party bosses to find savings that help offset Trump’s $4 trillion in broader tax cuts. But higher education leaders across the nation say the House GOP’s plans would imperil college access for working students and contend that their institutions can’t make up for the loss of federal financial aid.

“There are going to be some students who have the ability and have the passion and have the desire, but will not have the financial means to attend our universities. And there will be students that will not get the benefit of that higher education because of these reductions,” Rothman said.

During the 2024-25 award year, the maximum Pell Grant was $7,395, which is determined based on income, family size, federal poverty guidelines and other factors. The House-passed “big, beautiful bill” would require students to increase their course load from 24 credit hours a year to 30 each year to be eligible for the maximum amount of the grant.

Most students would likely have to take 15 credits per semester instead of 12 to get the full award, though students could take summer courses to meet the full-time requirements. The bill also includes language that would bar students enrolled less than half-time from the grant.

But the Senate has proposed scaling back the lower chamber’s dramatic changes to the grant, and appears to be sticking with its Pell plans in the chamber’s latest legislative text. The upper chamber’s plan would deem students ineligible for the grant if they receive federal, state, institutional or private aid that covers the full cost of attendance, something campus leaders and advocates deem more favorable. Education Chair Bill Cassidy’s proposal strips the full-time definition and half-time language from the panel’s portion of the reconciliation bill, to the disgruntlement of some House leaders.

“I’m not OK with it,” said House Education and Workforce Chair Tim Walberg, whose panel is responsible for the lower chamber’s Pell proposal. “But we learned that we have to deal with reality. We know that we have to pass the One Big Beautiful Bill.”

Walberg said he hasn’t seen anything in the Senate’s proposal that would be a deal breaker but worries about the long-term sustainability of the grant. Pell’s estimated shortfall could balloon up to $10 billion by the end of fiscal 2026.

Both the House and Senate proposals include funding to address the shortfall, but Walberg has said his proposed changes to eligibility would help rein in annual spending on Pell and help stave off another deficit.

“We thought it was very realistic,” the Michigan Republican said. “The issue is, if we’re going to pay for the shortfall that’s going to be in Pell, we have to make sure that we have students that are finishing up, completing an education and moving on.”

But some institutions are discouraging students from taking heavy course loads, saying student performance goes down the more classes they take, especially if they have obligations outside of school.

“We actually advise them to take 12, not 15, so that they will do well. Fifteen credits is far too many,” Trinity Washington University President Patricia McGuire said. “That is such a heavy, heavy academic load for students who are normally working. Also, many of them are raising their own children, many of them have family circumstances that are very stressful. Congress, in addition to not understanding how education works, have no concept of the lives of low-income students.”

McGuire, who has headed the D.C. university for over 30 years, said 60 to 70 percent of her nearly 2,000 students are Pell recipients.

“If this goes through, we will go out, and we will make the case directly to donors: Can you help us to close this new gap that the government has created?” she said. “But that also seems like we shouldn’t have to do that.”

Alabama Republican Sen. Tommy Tuberville, a HELP Committee member, said he just wants the reconciliation bill’s education proposals to be “right in the end” when asked about the House Pell plans. “Education is hugely important,” he said.

Pell eligibility changes, if they become law, could be much more acute for community colleges, where students are often part-time.

“At community colleges, we’re about careers, we’re about jobs, we’re about getting people into the workforce and if they can’t afford to access the education, then we certainly can’t get them into the workforce,” Forsyth Technical Community College President Janet Spriggs said.