New York Times says in an editorial that student loans should be subject to sunshine laws, careful policing and ethics rules that make it a crime to take money for access to colleges. This is misguided. Colleges will voluntarily step forward to show that their processes are clean now that there is focus on the issue. Those that don't should be spared the regulatory burden. Students will go to the school that gives them the best overall package. Competition will steer students to the schools with the best policy--taking into account both student loan rates and what the school does less of due to the way it administers the loans.

Why is the editorial misguided, Sam? Aren't all of the proposals in it good for the New York Times and its most valued subscribers (e.g. New York lawyers, educrats, and Democratic big-government politicians)?

Touché. I should have said they're "curiously appropriate" like the Altoid Mint slogan.

Ha ha, good one, Sam. If I use that phrase, do I owe you licensing fees?

Carl, I hereby give you full license to use that phrase to the extent allowed by law.