The Student Aid and Fiscal Responsibility Act -– a financial aid reform -– was bundled with the health care bill, which was passed last month. The SAFRA was overshadowed by its health care counterpart, but deserves as much attention. The act won’t affect most students until 2014, but the changes won’t be all bad. The SAFRA, as it is currently laid out, will benefit students and is a welcome relief from rising costs at state schools. Critics of the bill –- especially conservative critics –- shouldn’t be too quick to criticize the SAFRA’s shortcomings without recognizing its high points.

It’s time the government acknowledged the limited financial capabilities of many students, and that’s what the SAFRA attempts. Here are the main objectives: federal loans will be made directly to students instead of the government paying private banks to act as middlemen; community colleges will receive aid for programs aimed at displaced workers; the maximum Pell Grant will increase by about 7 percent and the number of available grants will be increased; loan repayments will be capped at 10 percent of a borrower’s income; and loan balances may be forgiven in 20 years for borrowers not employed in public service.

Like the health care portion of the White House’s historic reconciliation bill, the SAFRA is under fire. But the act has the potential to do much good without much interference. First, the SAFRA is an investment in Americans’ education, but won’t free them of fiscal responsibility. Funds allocated as a result of SAFRA legislation aren’t meant to cover 100 percent of college costs and shouldn’t be seen as uncalculated government handouts. Second, the government will save money by eliminating private banks from the process. That money is slated to be used for the Pell Grant expansion, according to the New York Times. Third, the payoff component of the act will both ease and expedite the daunting task of tending debt after school for many students.

The SAFRA is certainly not a perfect act, and some of its critics certainly have valid points. There are legitimate concerns that do deserve attention and debate, including the government’s trend toward overhauling the private sector. However, there is a place for accepting that some government moves might actually be helpful, and this is one of those places. It is both practical and charitable to acknowledge the benefits that may come with the SAFRA.