When the University announced last month that it would be voluntarily participating in the Federal Direct Student Loan Program next Fall, it did so partly to stay ahead of the curve. At the time, it appeared as if the federal government would enact legislation to disburse Stafford and PLUS loans directly to students instead of using private lenders to do so.

But now, the future of this federal plan—once considered a legislative shoo-in—is in jeopardy. The Democrats’ loss of a filibuster-proof 60 seats in the Senate coupled with increased lobbying from private loan companies have transformed the political landscape, making any effort to change the student loan system an uphill battle.

Higher education is a public good, and all Americans should have access to it. That’s why it is particularly disconcerting that Congress is hesitating to put students’ interests first and switch to direct lending.

As President Barack Obama and Secretary of Education Arne Duncan have noted, the current federally-funded student loan system is broken. Private companies offer loans to students, but if a student defaults, it is the government that pays the cost. Uncle Sam absorbs all of the risk, providing the private loan industry with what amounts to a subsidy of billions of dollars per year.

Right now, we have an inefficient system in which private lenders profit off the backs of taxpayers and students. This is unacceptable.

Recent attempts by the student loan industry to defend itself pose a formidable obstacle to proponents of change, but the arguments posed by these private companies are hollow and myopic.

Loan companies like Sallie Mae have argued that a switch to direct lending is an unwarranted government takeover of private industry that would cut back on customer service for students and eliminate thousands of jobs.

But government is already deeply involved in the student loan industry, and a federal takeover would only cut out the inefficient middle-man and ensure a taxpayer savings of around $80 billion over the next ten years, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

Moreover, portraying student loan reform as a job-killing government intervention in a private industry obfuscates the real issue at play: the federal loan system exists to increase access to higher education and develop the skills of the American people, not to provide jobs.

The bottom line is that a short-term job loss is a small price to pay in order to secure the long-term economic benefit of a better-educated work force. With savings from switching to direct lending, the government can expand the Pell Grant program and increase tax credits to families with student loans—both of which will help extend the opportunity for higher education to low-income Americans.

What we are seeing now in Washington is a classic case of lobbyists and private companies putting self-interest before the good of the American people. In response, presidents from major research universities like Duke as well as the leaders of community and state colleges—whose students stand to benefit most from direct lending and an expansion in Pell Grants—should fight back.

Congress must hear that when it comes to financing higher education for our country’s neediest, there should be no room for politics.