Student loans

https://thehill.com/homenews/education/4049576-senate-republicans-introduce-plan-to-tackle-student-loan-debt/amp/

Senate Republicans are unveiling their own plan to tackle student debt as the Supreme Court is set to rule soon on President Biden’s student debt relief program.

The GOP package, called the “Lowering Education Costs and Debt Act,” consists of five bills that the senators say will address the root causes of the student debt issue such as the increasing price of college and students taking out loans they can’t afford.



The “College Transparency Act (CTA)” would reform the college data reporting system so students have better information about outcomes at schools before committing to a university.

The “Understanding the True Cost of College Act” will require schools to have a similar style for their financial aid letters with a breakdown of the aid so students can better compare offers.

The “Informed Student Borrower Act” requires students to be more informed when applying for a loan by acknowledging they received student loan entrance materials or they participated in entrance counseling.

The students would receive materials that show how long it would take to pay off their loans, how much the monthly payments would be and what they will likely make going to a certain school and program. The students would receive this information yearly.

The fourth bill addresses the nine different student loan repayment options the Department of Education offers. These options, with eligibility based on income and loan type, gave borrowers different timeline options for paying off their loans and the amount they would owe each month.

The bill cuts those repayment options down to two to simplify the process. The standard 10-year repayment plan for borrowers would remain and the REPAYE program would stay, with some changes. The REPAYE program gives loan forgiveness earlier to low-income individuals who have low balances on their loans.

Additionally, loans can not be given to undergraduate or graduate programs that have shown the earning potential is not higher than a high school graduate or bachelor’s degree under the bill.

The last bill in the package aims to put pressure on graduate schools to lower costs, which account for almost half of student loan debt taken out each year.

The legislation would end Graduate PLUS loans, which had their borrowing limit removed in 2006. Republicans say this type of loan has increased the cost of college, calling it “inflationary.” Students would still have other loan options for graduate school such as Stafford loans, which are offered by the government, but have limits on borrowing.


———————

(R)’s have been criticized, often rightly, for not offering up solutions of their own. Well, here are some. All seem pretty sensible to me.
 
Does the constitution specify the punishment for any particular crimes?

The Constitution of the United States does not specify the punishment for any particular crimes. The Eighth Amendment prohibits excessive bail, excessive fines, and cruel and unusual punishments, but it does not list specific punishments for any crimes. This is because the framers of the Constitution wanted to leave the punishment of crimes up to the states and the federal government. They believed that this would allow for more flexibility in the criminal justice system and would prevent the federal government from becoming too powerful.

The specific punishments for crimes are typically defined by state and federal laws. These laws can vary from state to state and from crime to crime. For example, the punishment for murder in one state might be life in prison, while the punishment for murder in another state might be the death penalty.

The Eighth Amendment has been interpreted by the Supreme Court to mean that certain punishments are cruel and unusual, even if they are legal under state or federal law. For example, the Supreme Court has ruled that the death penalty is unconstitutional for certain crimes, such as rape.

The Eighth Amendment is a complex and evolving area of law. The Supreme Court has ruled on a number of cases that have clarified the meaning of the amendment. As the law continues to develop, it is likely that the Eighth Amendment will continue to play an important role in determining the punishments that can be imposed for crimes.
 
So what happens if a future court rules it constitutional? Reinstate that impeached President? What if its 10 years down the line? Your argument is absurd because constitutionality depends more on the idealogical makeup of the court and less on the actual constitution. What would we do with all these abortion rulings and laws down the line when a future court reinstates Roe v Wade? Throw the justices who overturned it in prison as well as all the lawmakers in states that passed abortion laws after the recent ruling in prison? Abortion would be the best argument for your position because we all know its only a matter of time until it gets reinstated. So anyone passing laws now they know will be overturned in the future shouild go to prison, right?
 
I propose adding a tax on the student loans and using it give a handout to people without college degrees since college graduates on average make more money than non college graduates.
 
https://thehill.com/homenews/education/4049576-senate-republicans-introduce-plan-to-tackle-student-loan-debt/amp/

Senate Republicans are unveiling their own plan to tackle student debt as the Supreme Court is set to rule soon on President Biden’s student debt relief program.

The GOP package, called the “Lowering Education Costs and Debt Act,” consists of five bills that the senators say will address the root causes of the student debt issue such as the increasing price of college and students taking out loans they can’t afford.



The “College Transparency Act (CTA)” would reform the college data reporting system so students have better information about outcomes at schools before committing to a university.

The “Understanding the True Cost of College Act” will require schools to have a similar style for their financial aid letters with a breakdown of the aid so students can better compare offers.

The “Informed Student Borrower Act” requires students to be more informed when applying for a loan by acknowledging they received student loan entrance materials or they participated in entrance counseling.

The students would receive materials that show how long it would take to pay off their loans, how much the monthly payments would be and what they will likely make going to a certain school and program. The students would receive this information yearly.

The fourth bill addresses the nine different student loan repayment options the Department of Education offers. These options, with eligibility based on income and loan type, gave borrowers different timeline options for paying off their loans and the amount they would owe each month.

The bill cuts those repayment options down to two to simplify the process. The standard 10-year repayment plan for borrowers would remain and the REPAYE program would stay, with some changes. The REPAYE program gives loan forgiveness earlier to low-income individuals who have low balances on their loans.

Additionally, loans can not be given to undergraduate or graduate programs that have shown the earning potential is not higher than a high school graduate or bachelor’s degree under the bill.

The last bill in the package aims to put pressure on graduate schools to lower costs, which account for almost half of student loan debt taken out each year.

The legislation would end Graduate PLUS loans, which had their borrowing limit removed in 2006. Republicans say this type of loan has increased the cost of college, calling it “inflationary.” Students would still have other loan options for graduate school such as Stafford loans, which are offered by the government, but have limits on borrowing.


———————

(R)’s have been criticized, often rightly, for not offering up solutions of their own. Well, here are some. All seem pretty sensible to me.

The dems have been whining about those "crisis" for years

Have they introduced a single policy solution to the underlying problem?
 
The dems have been whining about those "crisis" for years

Have they introduced a single policy solution to the underlying problem?

Here we go again. More bailouts... but no plan to address the cause for the need

These people are such idiots

[Tw]1674923628666691586[/tw]
 
Guys, the SCOTUS got this one wrong. Like really, really wrong. When Congress uses broad language, it should be assumed they intended a broad grant of power. The majority decision goes against basic rules of statutory construction.

You can disagree with Biden's plan all you want but his legal basis was sound. The problem is that the law he used was poorly thought out. But the court has said for decades that it's not their job to fix imprudent or poorly written statutes. I guess that's no longer the case.
 
Guys, the SCOTUS got this one wrong. Like really, really wrong. When Congress uses broad language, it should be assumed they intended a broad grant of power. The majority decision goes against basic rules of statutory construction.

You can disagree with Biden's plan all you want but his legal basis was sound. The problem is that the law he used was poorly thought out. But the court has said for decades that it's not their job to fix imprudent or poorly written statutes. I guess that's no longer the case.

Lol

Guys
.. the president can just unilaterally give away tax payer money!
 
Lol

Guys
.. the president can just unilaterally give away tax payer money!

That's just it, it's not unilateral. Congress made a poorly thought out law granting the Secretary of Education broad powers during a national emergency. If Congress wanted narrower use of the power they should have said that in the statute.

This is the risk legislators run when they hand broad powers to the president.
 
How is it student loans being forgiven is unconstitutional but forgiving PPP loans can be forgiven? I want every penny of that money back. Especially the money given to Church's. Atleast the people who took student loans actually pay taxes. Why do churches who have an omnipotent God on their side need my money? If your church doesn't have money maybe that's what God intended?



How many people tailing about student loan forgiveness accepted PPP loans and never paid those back?
 
How is it student loans being forgiven is unconstitutional but forgiving PPP loans can be forgiven? I want every penny of that money back. Especially the money given to Church's. Atleast the people who took student loans actually pay taxes. Why do churches who have an omnipotent God on their side need my money? If your church doesn't have money maybe that's what God intended?



How many people tailing about student loan forgiveness accepted PPP loans and never paid those back?

Because PPP loans were passed by congress
 
And these federal student loans werent?

The loan forgiveness itself was passed by congress.

Biden could have used his two year majority to pass student loan forgiveness. But it's wildly unpopular so he went the tyrannical route instead... and then got bitch slapped yet again from the courts.

Luckily, he faces no consequences for violating his oath
 
College if not free was very affordable
Back when

Tax rate went to 90% where it is now, what, ~27% ~ ?
Of course though
That was before manufacturing and the jobs were moved off shore
Where profit , bottom line was all that mattered

Before the mantra of greed is good.

There was no college debt
Great again indeed
 
The loan forgiveness itself was passed by congress.

Biden could have used his two year majority to pass student loan forgiveness. But it's wildly unpopular so he went the tyrannical route instead... and then got bitch slapped yet again from the courts.

Luckily, he faces no consequences for violating his oath

Not to mention, the PPP was created in response to a forced government shut down of businesses. Choosing to go to college and financing the investment via loan is entirely voluntary. It's a false equivalency.
 
College if not free was very affordable
Back when

Tax rate went to 90% where it is now, what, ~27% ~ ?
Of course though
That was before manufacturing and the jobs were moved off shore
Where profit , bottom line was all that mattered

Before the mantra of greed is good.

There was no college debt
Great again indeed

Yup college was quite affordable until the government got involved
 
The answer is simple. Crush the colleges and their endowments.

But the left will never go towards that direction.

Colleges pushed the concept you need a degree to succeed to their own benefit. They are the true bad actors in this scenario.
 
The answer is simple. Crush the colleges and their endowments.

But the left will never go towards that direction.

Colleges pushed the concept you need a degree to succeed to their own benefit. They are the true bad actors in this scenario.

This is actually the right answer. While I disagree with Conservatives that colleges are indoctrinating kids or whatever, it’s beyond obvious that they are bloated, overfunded and do not provide the value they purport to. We should be treating Universities as one of several strong educational/training outlets along with trade schools and certification programs for other types of jobs.
 
I had one employer tell me its not so much about the degree its just that when I see someone has a college degree I know they are able to put up with a lot of bull**** without quitting. We need colleges that teach what you get a degree for and cut out the rest of the BS. I love me some study of history but its not relevant to most degrees. I know there are so many degrees that dont actually teach you the skills you need and you end up learning them on the job. You just need that degree to get that entry level job.
 
Back
Top