Sorry, loan forgiveness just isn’t that easy

In fact, nearly all of the Democratic presidential candidates have come out with some kind of proposal to help reduce student debt and even President Donald Trump favors modifying repayment plans to make them less complicated for borrowers. Debt forgiveness, as Fishman says, is „the sexy new thing, the shiny object.“

But if you need evidence that erasing student debt in the U.S. would be a much thornier challenge than the candidates own up to, look no further than what’s happened with the country’s more limited attempt at it: the federal Public Service Loan Forgiveness program. Signed into law by President George W. But since the first borrowers became eligible for forgiveness 18 months ago, nearly 74,000 have applied and more than 99 percent have been rejected-a spectacular failure rate that has prompted widespread derision, anger and a spate of lawsuits, including one by the American Federation of Teachers accusing Education Secretary Betsy DeVos of gross mismanagement.

Many higher education payday loans Parkston experts applaud the candidates‘ desire to help struggling borrowers, but raise serious questions about the cost, effectiveness and fairness of the proposals so far. „For someone like me, who’s worked in the area for a long time, it’s exciting and heartwarming to know this issue is getting attention,“ says Scott-Clayton. „But now that we’ve crossed that major hurdle, the question is whether attention is being directed in the most productive way.“

Rather than costly broad strokes that offer relief even to borrowers who can comfortably manage their loan payments and that do little or nothing to prevent future student debt problems, many people in the field advocate more targeted initiatives. Devise solutions for what have already been identified as the most egregious problems, such as high default rates at for-profit schools and certificate programs, the overly complicated loan repayment system, and lofty loan limits and scanty credit checks for grad students, parents and others that allow them to borrow beyond their means.

For example, while federal loans for dependent undergraduate students are capped at $31,000, graduate students and parents under the PLUS loan program can borrow as much as it costs to attend. Unlike applying for virtually any other kind of loan, income and assets aren’t considered in the approval process. Borrowers only need to show they don’t have an adverse credit history, such as delinquent debt or a recent foreclosure or bankruptcy. As Looney wrote in a recent Brookings paper, „The simple, obvious mantra of reformers should be: Don’t make loans we know borrowers would suffer to repay.“

To focus solutions effectively, however, policymakers need to pay more attention to the facts than the spin and zero in on where the greatest pain points really are. As it stands now, most of the public debate is still focused on how much students are borrowing and how quickly big-balance loans are growing. But the most serious issues, as the statistics reveal to anyone who looks closely enough, have more to do with repayment, not new borrowing, and with small borrowers rather than large ones. Without that recognition, that aha moment, the „crisis“ won’t be resolved.

Bush in 2007, the program promised to forgive student loans for borrowers with a decade of service in government or nonprofit jobs

In the meantime, the clock is ticking. If the current rate of growth continues, outstanding student debt will exceed $2 trillion as soon as 2022. Let the hand wringing begin.

No plan has captured the public imagination more, though, than the sweeping proposals from Senators Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders to wipe out existing debt for all college borrowers (Sanders) or a large portion of loans for all but the wealthiest taxpayers (Warren)

Yes, $1.6 trillion is a troubling number. But it masks an equally important counter trend that not many people are aware of: In recent years, students collectively have been borrowing less, not more, for college. In fact, new borrowing-and new is the critical word here-has fallen in each of the past seven years.

The borrowing spree began around a decade ago with the establishment of the graduate PLUS loan program, which allows students to borrow up to the full cost of attendance, minus other aid, and only a cursory credit check required. The government also raised annual limits for traditional Stafford loans for graduate students to $20,500, up from $18,500 previously, and made it easier to borrow to attend online and for-profit programs.

But since a college degree typically leads to better job opportunities and higher pay, borrowing to get a B.A. is an investment that pays off for many and can help with the cost of housing and childcare. The typical graduate of a four-year college earns about 70 percent more than someone with only a high school diploma, while those with advanced degrees make about 120 percent more.

In fact, the research showed that women who are repaying student loans experience financial difficulties, including being unable to meet essential living expenses, at higher rates than men with college debt or people who had never borrowed or already paid off their balances. Just over one-third of women paying back students loans were struggling financially, including 57 percent of black women, compared with 24 percent of men with debt. „Paired with the gender pay gap, the effect of higher student loan debt for women is pernicious,“ says Churches. „It follows them not just throughout their careers but over their entire lifespans.“