We reached those last days when we could endure neither our vices nor their remedies.
Titus Livy, on the decline of Rome
If Congress does not act, interest rates for the federal student loan program will rise to 6.8percent in July of this year.
Last week, three Republican senators published an op ed essay in the New York Times suggesting what they think is a better way for setting student loan rates than the current system. Senators Lamar Alexander, Tom Coburn and Richard Burr proposed that student-loan interest rates be set at the fluctuating 10-year Treasury rate plus 3 percent.
Keeping interest rates low for student loans is obviously a good thing for students. But let's face it, the student loan program is a catastrophe, and low interest rates for student loans won't fix this enormous problem.
First of all, although the federal government has never revealed the true default rate on student loans, evidence from many sources shows that it quite high. For students who attend for-profit institutions, the default rate over the lifetime of the repayment period is probably 40 to 50 percent. Lowering interest rates is not likely to shrink the default rates--especially in the for-profit sector.
Second, income-based repayment plans, which are being pushed as a way to ease the burden on overstressed student-loan debtors, are making the default problem worse. Lowering default rates will provide some marginal relief to former students in IBRPs, but it won't solve their underlying problem, which is that they borrowed more money than they can pay back.
Under an IBRP, students pay back their loans over a long period of time--20 to 25 years--based on a percentage of their income. Any unpaid amount at the end of the repayment period is forgiven.
Under an IBRP, students pay back their loans over a long period of time--20 to 25 years--based on a percentage of their income. Any unpaid amount at the end of the repayment period is forgiven.
This may sound like a great idea, but this is the harsh reality: A lot of student-loan debtors who participate in IBRPs, probably a majority of them, will never pay back their total loan obligations even if they make every loan payment on time.
Why? Because under an IBRP, the monthly loan payment will not be enough to cover accruing interest for many student-loan debtors. Thus, their debt will continue to grow even if they faithfully make their monthly payments.
Why? Because under an IBRP, the monthly loan payment will not be enough to cover accruing interest for many student-loan debtors. Thus, their debt will continue to grow even if they faithfully make their monthly payments.
A recent New York Times story illustrates this problem. The Times reported on a veterinary school graduate who borrowed $300,000 to attend a for-profit veterinary school in the Caribbean. She obtained a job as a veterinarian--which is a good thing, and she is paying back her loans under an income-based repayment plan.
Unfortunately, her loan payments are not enough to pay back the accruing interest on her loans. The New York Times estimated that the total amount of her debt will grow to $600,000 by the time her loan repayment obligations end even if she makes every payment on time!
Back when I was practicing law, my senior law partner told me I should admit my mistakes as soon as I realized I had made an error. The longer I went without acknowledging my mistakes, my partner stressed, the bigger my problems would become.
Over the years, I have found my former law partner's observation to be true 100 percent of the time. The whole premise of the federal student loan program is flawed. Over time it has grown into a $100 billion a year industry that has benefited colleges and universities but has hurt a lot of students. Total outstanding indebtedness is now over $1 trillion--making student loan debt the second biggest consumer-debt sector in the American economy after home mortgages.
Fixing this mess won't be easy, and it will be painful. But if we don't take drastic action, the federal student loan program (and the accompanying private student loan industry) will destroy American higher education. Indeed, it has already seriously undermined legal education.
What must we do?
First, we must allow overstressed student-loan debtors reasonable access to the bankruptcy courts. Let's face facts: most defaulting student-loan debtors are never going to pay back their loans, even if they are denied bankruptcy relief. It would be far better both for debtors and the national economy if these unfortunate people were permitted to clear their debts in bankruptcy and go on with their lives.
Second, we must stop allowing for-profit colleges and universities to participate in the student loan program. Even if all for-profit institutions were acting in good faith--and some of them are not--the default rate in this sector is simply too high to justify for-profit participation in the student loan program.
Furthermore, the U.S. has plenty of non-profit and public institutions to serve the needs of postsecondary students. In my opinion, postsecondary students would have plenty of good options for obtaining a college degree even if the University of Phoenix, Kaplan University and Capella University did not exist.
Finally, every college and university in the United States must be obligated to freeze tuition and fees at the current level as a condition of participating in the federal student loan program: and they must be further obligated to freeze salaries and benefits of their top executives.
President Obama, Congress, and the higher-education industry want to tinker with the student-loan problem, which is growing bigger every day. But lowering interest rates and encouraging students to go into income-based repayment programs will not fix this problem. The solutions must be drastic, and they must be painful.
References
Lamar Alexander, Tom Coburn and Richard Burr. Playing Politics With Student Debt. New York Times, June 5, 2013, p. A21.
David Segal, High Debt and Falling Demand Trap Vets. New York Times, February 23, 2013, p. A1.
References
Lamar Alexander, Tom Coburn and Richard Burr. Playing Politics With Student Debt. New York Times, June 5, 2013, p. A21.
David Segal, High Debt and Falling Demand Trap Vets. New York Times, February 23, 2013, p. A1.
No comments:
Post a Comment