Subscriber Benefit
As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe NowPresident Joe Biden’s second attempt at student loan cancellation moved forward Tuesday with a first round of negotiations to help guide the administration to a new plan.
The Biden administration vowed to try again after the Supreme Court rejected an earlier plan in June. In opening remarks at Tuesday’s hearing, Under Secretary of Education James Kvaal said the debt crisis threatens to undercut the promise of higher education.
“Student loan debt in this country has grown so large that it siphons off the benefits of college for many students,” Kvaal said in prepared remarks. “Some loans made to young adults stretch into retirement with no hope of being repaid. These debt burdens are shared by families and communities.”
Biden directed the Education Department to find another path to loan relief after conservatives on the high court ruled that he couldn’t cancel loans using a 2003 law called the HEROES Act.
The latest attempt will rest on a sweeping law known as the Higher Education Act, which gives the education secretary authority to waive student loans, although how far that power extends is the subject of legal debate.
The Education Department hopes to settle the dispute by adding federal rules that clarify when the secretary can waive student loans. To change those rules, however, the department is required to assemble a committee of outside negotiators to help hash out details.
The first day of negotiations, held virtually, lasted more than five hours but appeared to bring the department no closer to clarity. Much of the discussion centered on the shortcomings of existing student loan cancellation programs or problems caused by student loan interest.
Department officials repeatedly intervened to say those problems don’t fall under the scope of the current process.
The negotiators all come from outside the federal government and represent a range of viewpoints on student loans. The panel includes students and officials from a range of colleges, along with loan servicers, state officials and advocates including the NAACP.
It’s unclear who will be eligible for forgiveness under the new plan and how much relief they would get. Those details will be decided after the administration takes input from the negotiators, who meet in a series of sessions scheduled to continue into December.
Responding to suggestions from the panel, administration officials said they aren’t considering blanket cancellation.
“We are not looking at a broad-based debt cancellation where we are going to wipe off debt in its entirety. We are looking at individual ways that the secretary can exercise the authority to grant waivers,” said Tamy Abernathy, who leads a policy group in the department.
She later clarified that the department’s next proposal “could cancel some borrowers’ debt completely, but it could not cancel all borrowers debt completely.”
At the end of the process, negotiators will vote on a proposed rule drafted with input from their discussions. If they reach consensus on a proposal, the department will move forward with it. If they don’t, the agency will propose its own plan, which can be finalized after a public comment period.
The Education Department routinely uses negotiated rulemaking to enact federal regulation, and it’s required for any regulation related to student financial aid. It can be a long and painstaking process, and it often finishes without consensus among negotiators.
Biden has called for a new plan to help “as many borrowers as possible,” but it’s unclear whether it will be as expansive as his first proposal. That plan would have canceled up to $20,000 in federal student loans for borrowers with incomes below $125,000 or couples below $250,000.
Republicans rallied against the cancellation, saying it would add an unfair benefit for college graduates at the expense of millions of taxpayers who didn’t attend college. In 2022, about 47% of Americans age 25 or older had at least an associate degree, along with 15% who went to college but had no degree, according to the Census Bureau.
The administration plans to finalize the new rule sometime next year, but Education Secretary Miguel Cardona has declined to say if it will be in place before next fall’s presidential election. In a recent interview with The Associated Press, he said he’s working “as quickly as possible.”
He also noted that the court’s ruling “will have to factor in to the steps we take moving forward.”
Some legal analysts see the court’s decision as a rejection of any mass cancellation without action from Congress. The court concluded that the education secretary has power “to make modest adjustments and additions to existing provisions, not transform them.”
As a starting point for negotiators, the Education Department published an issue paper outlining some of the primary questions that will be up for debate. It offers few clues on the department’s vision for loan cancellation, but it identifies five groups of borrowers who may be in need of relief.
Negotiators are being asked how the agency should help:
— Borrowers whose interest grows so much that their balances exceed what they initially owed;
— Those who are eligible for loan cancellation under existing income-driven repayment plans but have not applied for those programs;
— Those who borrowed loans to attend college programs that didn’t lead to jobs with enough earnings to repay their loans;
— Borrowers with older loans taken out before Congress created benefits meant to ease the burden of student debt;
— Those who face hardships “that the current student loan system does not adequately address.”
It also asks negotiators to discuss the types of factors that would merit loan cancellation. The paper notes that, when deciding whether to collect on debt, some other federal agencies consider whether it “would be against equity and good conscience,” or if it would “impose financial hardship.”
At a White House briefing last week, Biden drew attention to the problem of ballooning interest. Many college graduates have been making payments for years, he said, “but because of interest, they still owe more than they originally borrowed.”
“My administration is doing everything it can to deliver student debt relief to as many as we can, as fast as we can,” Biden said.
The negotiators will meet virtually for two-day sessions on Nov. 6 and Dec. 11.
Please enable JavaScript to view this content.
Just quit it with the loan forgiveness.
College has always been a choice. Along with the choice of which school to attend.
There is no such thing as loans being canceled rather they just get shifted to actual taxpayers to repay.
Time to reimburse me for all the tuition payments I made that I didn’t take a loan out for but worked to pay during school. Maybe throw in a few vacations and nice things that these students use their loan money for also.
I’d like my mortgage canceled. Pretty please!?
My mortgage identifies as a student loan. Can I get relief too?
Negotiators are being asked how the agency should help:
— Borrowers whose interest grows so much that their balances exceed what they initially owed; I AGREE–THIS GROUP SHOULD GET SOME ASSISTANCE AND CURRENT PROGRAMS SHOULD BE MODIFIED TO PREVENT THIS FROM HAPPENING.
— Those who are eligible for loan cancellation under existing income-driven repayment plans but have not applied for those programs; WHAT IS THE EXISTING INCOME-DRIVEN REPAYMENT PLAN THAT MAKES SOMEONE ELIGIBLE TO CANCEL? THAT LIST SHOULD BE VERY VERY SHORT.
— Those who borrowed loans to attend college programs that didn’t lead to jobs with enough earnings to repay their loans; IT IS NOT THE TAXPAYERS PROBLEM THAT SOMEONE GOT THEIR COLLEGE DEGREE AND THEN WERE NOT ABLE TO CAPITALIZE ON IT AND EARN ENOUGH TO PAY THEIR LOANS BACK. YOU DON’T HAVE TO WORK IN THE FIELD OF YOUR DEGREE. JUST FIND WORK.
— Borrowers with older loans taken out before Congress created benefits meant to ease the burden of student debt; CONGRESS SHOULD LOOK TO THE UNIVERSITIES TO REDUCE STUDENT LOANS/DEBT. THERE IS SO MUCH MONEY IN COLLEGE SPORTS AND OPPORTUNITIES TO PARTNER WITH LOCAL BUSINESSES. UTILIZE SOME OF THAT TO DECREASE ROOM AND BOARD AND TUITION.
— Those who face hardships “that the current student loan system does not adequately address.” THE ONLY THING THAT SHOULD QUALIFY AS A HARDSHIP IS A MEDICAL CONDITION AND/OR MASSIVE MEDICAL BILLS FROM AN ILLNESS. THEN WE SHOULD BE FORGIVING THE MEDICAL DEBT–NOT THE STUDENT LOANS. DO PEOPLE THINK IT IS EASY FOR ANYONE TO PAY THEIR STUDENT LOANS?
It also asks negotiators to discuss the types of factors that would merit loan cancellation. The paper notes that, when deciding whether to collect on debt, some other federal agencies consider whether it “would be against equity and good conscience,” or if it would “impose financial hardship.” THE ONLY THING THAT SHOULD QUALIFY AS A HARDSHIP IS A MEDICAL CONDITION AND/OR MASSIVE MEDICAL BILLS FROM AN ILLNESS. THEN WE SHOULD BE FORGIVING THE MEDICAL DEBT–NOT THE STUDENT LOANS. DO PEOPLE THINK IT IS EASY FOR ANYONE TO PAY THEIR STUDENT LOANS? OF COURSE A LARGE LOAN IS A HARDSHIP. DUH!
Everyone who objects to this is primarily doing so because they aren’t receiving the benefit and somebody else is. Get over it. If the loan forgiveness applied to you, you would be totally fine with it. The same old what’s in it for me? Try empathy instead of anger for a change. Btw, I have nothing to gain from this program as I went to college in the 70’s when education was affordable and considered to be a good thing. Like in most advanced countries, education (academic or trade) in the US should be free or close to it.
“Get over it,” says Greg to welders and mechanics and plumbers and brick layers. “The art history and women’s studies majors are more important to society, and just because they took out huge loans for a degree program that has no viability in the market place, it is up to you to use your taxes to subsidize their poor decision making.”
“Also,” Greg adds, “If you did take out huge student loans in the 2000s and lived frugally so you could pay it off before 2021, get over it as well. You made the responsible decision but at the wrong time. Get over it.”
Historically, products that people don’t pay for usually end up becoming garbage. Spain, by and large, has a completely subsidized university system. Outside of a few schools, the majority are so haphazardly managed that neither the students nor professors can often be arsed to show up for class. No incentive. Nothing at stake.
Ascribing value to a service like higher ed allows the buyer to have some skin in the game and elevates the chance that he/she will commit to the full terms and conditions of the purchase. It also forces the institutions to remain competitive. But for the last 40 years, that hasn’t happened so much as schools take the student aid and divert those allotments to plush buildings and more bureaucrats, rather than actually making the price tag of education lower. And the quality has plunged simultaneously. At this point, it’s hard to say whether an American or UK education (where it still has a price tag, albeit much lower in the UK) is any better than one in Spain. Or Sudan.