Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lost my vote. Why am I paying off the poor decisions of these people?

I voted for Obama, Clinton, and Biden. Not now.

This is a ridiculously stupid hill to die on.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lost my vote. Why am I paying off the poor decisions of these people?

I voted for Obama, Clinton, and Biden. Not now.

This is a ridiculously stupid hill to die on.

Anonymous wrote:Free handouts for student loan + antisemitism on college = Biden is subsidizing antisemitism

Anonymous wrote:Lost my vote. Why am I paying off the poor decisions of these people?

I voted for Obama, Clinton, and Biden. Not now.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This guy had $250,000 in student loans forgiven.

He says it will allow him to go to India to study with his meditation teacher.

https://www.businessinsider.com/how-to-get-student-loan-forgiveness-income-driven-repayment-genx-2024-4?amp

Why are you lying? It’s pay walled, but the bullet points say this, very clearly: “Lambdin said the relief would allow him to save for retirement and consider long-term dreams.” So it’s not like the US taxpayer is funding some wild hare this fellow has to go stomping around the subcontinent to fulfill his heart’s song.

Lambdin said the relief was also allowing him the freedom to pursue some of his long-term dreams, including taking a sabbatical to study with his meditation teacher in India.

Anonymous wrote:This guy had $250,000 in student loans forgiven.

He says it will allow him to go to India to study with his meditation teacher.

https://www.businessinsider.com/how-to-get-student-loan-forgiveness-income-driven-repayment-genx-2024-4?amp

Anonymous wrote:This guy had $250,000 in student loans forgiven.

He says it will allow him to go to India to study with his meditation teacher.

https://www.businessinsider.com/how-to-get-student-loan-forgiveness-income-driven-repayment-genx-2024-4?amp

Anonymous wrote:Student loan forgiveness is literally part of the existing law. 10 years of repayments under PSLF, 20 years of repayments for undergrad loans, and 25 years of repayments for grad school loans. Forgiveness if you went to a fraudulent school or a school that shut down and left you without a degree.

George W Bush literally signed the law on this and now Biden is implementing it.

Who are all these people who want Biden to ignore the law?

Biden does not have statutory authority to impose these regulations.
The administration’s last attempt at loan forgiveness was thrown out by the Supreme Court for violating the major questions doctrine, which requires clear congressional authorization for executive actions of major economic or political issues.

Student loan forgiveness on the scale proposed in these regulations clearly meets the major economic or political threshold. The overturned loan forgiveness plan was estimated to cost around $500 billion. The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget estimates this one would cost $250–750 billion once you include the economic hardship provisions (which are still under development). Even the $147 billion cost that the administration estimates (which excludes the economic hardship provisions) would qualify as major since it dwarfs the scale of annual aid provided by main federal financial aid programs like Pell Grants ($27 billion) and student loans ($83 billion).

Nor is there clear statutory authorization. As Mark Kantrowitz lays out, the entire legal case for the regulations rests on a provision that allows the Secretary of Education to “enforce, pay, compromise, waive, or release any right, title, claim, lien, or demand, however acquired, including any equity or any right of redemption.” Yet there are four problems with the claim that this provides legal authorization for the new regulations.

First, the most plausible reading of this authority is that it applies to loan forgiveness plans that have been authorized by laws Congress has passed, such as the Public Sector Loan Forgiveness (PSLF) program. Congress passed a law setting up PSLF, with all sorts of eligibility criteria and requirements to waive debt for some borrowers. Why would they have done that if the secretary could have just waived all that debt under existing law?

Second, the waiver authority is granted for a different loan program. In particular, it applies to the Federal Family Education Loan Program (FFELP) which stopped making loans in 2010, not the Direct Loan (DL) program under which all new and most old debt falls. The administration claims that a provision stipulating that DL loans “have the same terms, conditions, and benefits” as FFELP loans means the waiver authority applies to DL too. But as Kantrowitz notes, “a waiver of a ‘right, title, claim, lien, or demand’ is not a term, condition or benefit of a loan.”

Third, the secretary’s waiver authority is only authorized on a case‐​by‐​case basis. For example, PSLF requires students to document their eligibility and income, which are then evaluated separately for each borrower. The proposed regulations ignore the requirement that waivers be granted on a case‐​by‐​case basis and instead try to waive part or all of the debt for almost two‐​thirds of borrowers en masse.

Fourth, the regulations ignore the requirement that the federal government try to collect the debts it is owed. In particular, the Federal Claims Collection Standards lay out various conditions under which debts to the federal government can be waived. How do the new regulations deal with these requirements? By simply stating they can be ignored. Is everyone now allowed to just ignore regulations they don’t want to comply with, or just the Biden administration?