Thursday, June 16, 2022

Why are Progressives Criticizing Biden's Student-Loan Forgiveness Plan?

 President Biden promised college borrowers $10,000 in student-loan forgiveness when he was on the campaign trail. He has yet to deliver on that promise.

Some progressives urge Biden to forgive more student debt. The NAACP said, "$10,000 is not enough, We're calling on our elected officials to cancel federal student loan debt with no means-testing." Senators Elizabeth Warren and Chuck Schumer want Biden to forgive $50,000  per person in student debt.

Surprisingly, some progressives criticize the very idea of blanket student-loan forgiveness.  The Washington Post, perhaps America's most progressive newspaper, published an editorial saying Biden's plan "is yet another taxpayer-funded subsidy for the middle class." The Brookings Institution, a left-of-center think tank, stated bluntly, "One-off, across-the-board forgiveness is capricious and unfair."

USA Today, another progressive newspaper, expressed concern that Biden's student-loan forgiveness plan is complicated by "soaring inflation." And CNN, which is generally supportive of Biden's policy agenda, recently reported that Biden's student-debt cancelation plan "might not be such a great idea."

Why are influential progressive organizations backing away from President Biden's plan to give $10,000 in debt forgiveness to the vast majority of student borrowers?

I think there are two reasons:

First, $10,000 in student-debt forgiveness is a pittance when the average student borrower leaves college with three times that amount of debt, and several million college graduates have debt exceeding $100,000. 

As NAACP President Derrick Johnson put it, canceling $10,000 in student debt would be "like pouring a bucket of ice water on a forest fire. In other words, it won't do anything, especially for the Black community." Johnson called Biden's plan "a slap in the face."

Secondly, I think there is growing concern that the federal student loan program has run amok and that the Department of Education is concealing the true default rate. The feds have already allowed student borrowers to skip their monthly loan payments for two and a half years at great expense to taxpayers. Granting blanket student-debt forgiveness might plunge the program even further into insolvency.

It is disappointing that congressional critics of Biden's debt forgiveness proposal have offered no alternatives other than even more extravagant debt forgiveness.

In my view, our nation won't begin to get the federal student loan program under control until Congress enacts these three reforms:

  • The federal government should bar the venal for-profit college industry from participating in the student-loan program.
  • The Parent Plus program, which has brought so much suffering to minority and low-income families, should be abolished.
  • Distressed student borrowers should have reasonable access to the bankruptcy courts.
If enacted, these reforms won't solve the student-loan crisis overnight, but they will help keep it from worsening. 

But universities must do their part by lowering the cost of going to college. Unfortunately, the universities are doing the opposite-- raising their tuition rates and forcing students to borrow more and more money to get a college education.




Tuesday, June 14, 2022

Parent-Plus Loans Are a National Scandal

President Biden is flirting with a massive student-loan forgiveness plan--$10,000 in debt relief for 97 percent of all college borrowers.

The Washington Post, perhaps America's most progressive newspaper, urges him not to pull the trigger. 

"Biden could ease the burden on the genuinely disadvantaged in a number of more targeted ways," the WP editorial board advised, "and avoid setting a precedent for broad forgiveness of loans that future presidents will be pressured to match."

I think Biden will honor his campaign promise and forgive $10,000 in student debt for millions of borrowers. Is that a good idea?

I don't think so. As the WP pointed out, this plan would cost almost a quarter of a trillion dollars, and 71 percent of the benefits would go to the top half of the income scale.

Instead, why doesn't the Biden administration focus on debt relief for the most overburdened student debtors and their parents? 

According to the Century Foundation, which recently published a report on the Parent Plus program, 3.7 million parents collectively owe $104 billion--money that parents borrowed to help pay their children's college expenses. 

This is what the Century Foundation found:

  • The median Parent Plus debt is $29,600.
  • Thousands of retired or disabled parents have had their Social Security benefits reduced because they defaulted on their Parent Plus loans.
  • Black and Hispanic parents take out proportionately more Parent Plus loans than White parents.
  • The use of Parent Plus use is greatest at HBCUs, where most students are African American.
  • At 59 HBCUs, no more than ten percent of Parent Plus borrowers made significant progress in paying off their loans after ten years.
  • And here is a shocking statistic: "At some large for-profit colleges, Parent Plus makes up the majority of all financial aid received by undergraduates."
If progressive political leaders want to do something significant to address the hardships created by the federal student loan program, they should do these three things:

1) Stop withholding Social Security benefits to elderly and disabled student borrowers and Parent Plus borrowers, something Senator Elizabeth Warren proposed several years ago.

2) Eliminate the "undue hardship" rule in the Bankruptcy Code and allow distressed student and parent borrowers to discharge their student-loan debt in bankruptcy like any other nonsecured debt.

2) Abolish the Parent Plus Program altogether.

It is unclear whether Biden's $10,000 debt-relief proposal will benefit Parent Plus borrowers. I hope so.

Nevertheless, even if parents are included in Biden's proposal, $10,000 in debt forgiveness won' be enough to alleviate their suffering. What distressed Parent Plus borrowers really need is bankruptcy relief. 

Unfortunately, bankruptcy relief is not in the political cards.




Saturday, June 4, 2022

Biden Administration Flirts With Sweeping Student-Loan Forgiveness While Dept of Education Treats All Student Debtors Like Deadbeats: I Don't Get It

Earlier this week, the Department of Education wiped away all student debt owed by more than a million former students who attended one of the Corinthian Colleges campuses. The cost? About $5.8 billion.

Since his administration began, President Biden has approved $25 billion in loan forgiveness for 1.3 million student borrowers. That's a lot of student debt relief.

Nevertheless, more than 40 million Americans are still on the hook for a total of $1.7 trillion in student loans. Many of these folks want President Biden to forgive all of this debt

Biden has proposed debt relief of $10,000 per borrower. Progressive Democratic leaders want $50,000 of student-debt relief for all student debtors (with some sort of income cap). Various advocacy groups urge Biden to forgive all student debt, which burdens minority students and women disproportionately.

These proposals presume that every student debtor took out college loans in good faith. No one wants to offer loan relief on a case-by-case basis based on merit or attempt to identify students who may have committed fraud in handling their student loans.

In other words, all debt relief schemes now under discussion take it as a given that everyone--all 45 million borrowers--is honest and entitled to some debt relief. 

I applaud this approach. Only a tiny percentage of student borrowers took out loans to defraud the government. Almost all of them went into debt to get an education they hoped would improve their lives. And many student borrowers weren't able to obtain a job after graduation that paid enough to justify their educational expenses.

So--I am puzzled. Since President Biden and congressional leaders advocate for massive student debt relief without examining each debtor's individual circumstances, why does the  U.S. Department of Education continue harassing distressed college borrowers in the bankruptcy courts?

Let's look at a bankruptcy court decision issued less than three months ago: Everson v. U.S. Department of Education. In that case, Kimberlee Everson took out student loans to get an associate's degree in medical assisting from Bryant Stratton College, a for-profit institution.

She obtained her degree and went to work as a medical assistant for various employers at an hourly rate of between $12.50 to $23 an hour. By the time she appeared in bankruptcy court, her student debt had grown to $45,000--including accrued interest.

Judge Caryl Dilano, a Florida bankruptcy judge, reviewed Ms. Everson's financial status in painstaking detail and refused to discharge her debt. Judge Dilano pointed out that Ms. Everson went out to eat occasionally, had a gym membership, and sometimes made purchases at a liquor store. 

He also heard evidence from the Department of Education that Ms. Everson was eligible for a long-term, income-based repayment plan that would only require her to pay $48 a month on her $45,000 debt.

In Judge Dilano's opinion, Ms. Everson met two prongs of the three-prong Brunner test.  First, it would be an undue hardship for her to pay off her student loans. Second, her precarious financial circumstances were not likely to improve due to factors beyond her control.

Nevertheless, the judge refused to grant Ms. Everson a discharge because she failed the Brunner test's third prong--the good-faith test. He believed Everson had not handled her student loans in good faith. Notably, Judge Dilano pointed out that she had made only minimal payments on her loans over seven years.

The Department of Education has forgiven $25 billion in student debt owed by more than a million people without subjecting any of these debtors to the onerous Brunner test.

How many millions have gym memberships? How many go out to eat occasionally? How many patronize liquor stores?

I don't get it.

If a million and a half people are getting student-debt relief without regard to their payment history or their lifestyles, why is Judge Dilano devoting judicial resources to determining whether Kimberlee Everson dined out too often?

Sources

Everson v. U.S. Department of Education, Case No. 2:20-bk-03062-FMDAdv. Pro. No. 2:20-ap-267-FMD, 2022 WL909570 (M.D. Fla. March 29, 2022).

Senators Warren & Schumer 




Saturday, May 28, 2022

College Enrollments are Down, Tuition Prices are Up & Student-Loan Forgiveness Is on the Way: The Wounded Grizzly Syndrome

 Earlier this week, Inside Higher Education reported that college enrollments have declined for five straight semesters. In the spring 2020 semester--when the COVID epidemic began--the nation's colleges enrolled 17.1 million students. Today, 15.9 million Americans are in postsecondary classes--a decline of 1.2 million students.

Some states saw more significant declines than others, and some saw enrollments grow. California suffered an 8.1 percent decline, the most significant drop among the states.

New Hampshire's student population actually grew after the pandemic hit, mainly due to increased online enrollment. I imagine a lot of that growth can be attributed to the University of Southern New Hampshire, which aggressively markets its online programs.

Businesses operating in a market economy often slash prices when demand falls for their products. But American colleges keep raising their tuition. Boston University--a very pricey institution, will increase undergraduate tuition by 4.25 percent next year. 

BU's tuition rate will be $61,000 for the 2022-2023 academic year. And total cost, including room and board, is almost $80,000. Ouch!

Not to worry, BU tells us on its website. Each year the university awards almost a third of a billion dollars in financial assistance to undergraduates. In other words, BU assures us, most students won't have to pay the sticker price.

Indeed, colleges all over the United States are slashing tuition to lure students through the door. The National Association of College and University Business Officers said that schools are discounting tuition for first-year students by 54 percent on average.

Four out of five undergraduates will get a tuition discount in the coming academic year, NACUBO reported. So if you pay the total price to attend BU, you got suckered.

For more than a quarter of a century, colleges have raised their tuition prices annually above the cost of inflation. But the party is about to end.  

Young people are beginning to wonder if it makes sense to borrow $100,000 or more to get a liberal arts degree from an elite school if their diploma doesn't lead to a good job. 

With inflation running at a 40-year high, most colleges can no longer raise their tuition prices to cover their increased costs. BU's tuition hike of 4.25 percent is below this year's 8 percent inflation rate.

The Biden administration is signaling that it will forgive at least some student debt.  During the election campaign, Mr. Biden promised to grant $10,000 in student debt relief to students from lower-income or middle-income families. According to a recent Washington Post story, Biden will likely keep that promise.

I hate to break the news to you, President Biden. Ten thousand dollars in debt relief ain't nearly enough.  Millions of students have seen their total debt double over the years due to accrued interest. 

Offering to forgive $10,000 in debt to someone who owes $60,000 is like shooting a grizzly bear in the gut. The shot doesn't kill the bear; it just pisses him off.

Ten thousand dollars in student-debt relief won't make anyone happy.






Monday, May 23, 2022

Kool-Aid and Baloney Sandwiches: The Days of Cheap Road Trips Are Over

In Coat of Many Colors, Dolly Parton sang that you are only poor if you choose to be. That was my parents' philosophy when I was a kid. We ain't poor; we're middle class.

Perhaps to prove that we were climbing upward on America's economic ladder, my parents took us kids to Disney Land in 1958. My dad bought a Chevy station wagon without air conditioning, and we were on our way. 

We headed west on Highway 66--America's Mother Road. We stopped for lunch at rest stops along the way, where my mom would slap a slice of baloney between two pieces of Wonder Bread. That was lunch--along with Koolaid, which Mom mixed herself.

In those days, people couldn't book hotel rooms online like we can today. On the road west, my dad would drive the family from one motel to another every evening until we found one with the right price.  I imagine that was a little stressful for my parents.

As I said, our Chevy wasn't air-conditioned, but my dad borrowed a tube-shaped air conditioner that fitted on a passenger window.  Didn't work too well.  

Dad also borrowed a canvas waterbag that pictured a Native American in a war bonnet. He hung the bag on the car's front grille. Dad would turn the hose on the waterbag every time we stopped for gas. 

Of course, the water on the waterbag evaporated quickly under the hot Southwestern sun. Theoretically, this evaporation cooled the water inside the waterbag. Theoretically.

On the way home, our car broke down in Santa Rosa, New Mexico, and we had to spend a night there. The repair cost for fixing the transmission was astronomical--one hundred bucks!

Looking back, I now realize that it wasn't easy for my family to drive to California in 1958. Still, we saw everything a middle-class American family would want to see: the Grand Canyon, the Petrified Forest, Disney Land, Sea World, Knott's Berry Farm, and the friggin' Pacific Ocean.

Oh, those were the Good Old Days! 

Today most families would head for Disney World in Florida--not Disney Land in California. A middle-class family would drive to the resort by car and stay in a respectable chain hotel.  The family would likely eat their meals in restaurants rather than make their own sandwiches at roadside parks. 

But maybe not. Inflation has gone up so fast and so high that many people who consider themselves middle-class may be priced out of a trip to Disney World.

First, the cost of four-day theme-park tickets for a family of four is about two grand.  Five nights in one of Disney's moderate-priced hotels will cost $1600 for a standard room with two queen-size beds. Meals for six days will cost a family of four about $1600 (according to Urban Tastebuds).

So, we're talking five grand plus the cost of driving to the world's grandest theme park.  Gas is projected to hit $6.00 a gallon by summer's end.

And souvenirs--don't forget the cost of souvenirs. Mickey and Minnie don't come cheap.

Altogether, a one-week vacation to Disney World will cost a family of four about $6,000. 

You can't handle that? Don't worry. As Dolly Parton reminded us, we're only poor if we choose to be.  

So if you can't afford a summer vacation for your family this year, just tell yourself you're still in the middle class. And keep telling yourself that until you believe it. 

Who needs bottled water?







Tuesday, May 17, 2022

Walking on the Sunny Side of the Street: 53 percent of the nation's infants receive federal food aid

 Is everybody having fun? According to the feds, the economy is booming: millions of new jobs and rising wages.  The defense industry and its stockholders are getting rich from the Ukraine War, and college students are likely to get all their student-loan debt forgiven. Ain't that great!

In Baton Rouge, where I live, thousands of people got Payroll Protection money. Many of these folks are remodeling their houses or shopping for vacation homes. The restaurants are full of people eating fried oysters and sipping tropical drinks. The roads are full of luxury cars. There's never been a better time to be alive!

But maybe not. A lot of Americans are hurting; we just don't see them. The U.S. Department of Agriculture is feeding millions of low-income families. USDA's own website says it provides supplemental nutrition to 53 percent of all the nation's infants. 

In Houston, where housing prices are going through the roof, and people are waiting in line to buy Audis, the Houston Foodbank is feeding 800,000 people a year. That's a lot of people who need supplemental food in an economy of rising wages and a robust job market. 

And how about the millions of retired people who live on fixed incomes? Television ads show senior Americans gamboling on tropical beaches with their grandkids, playing golf with their buddies, or traveling to beautiful and exotic places,

But that is not a reality for most retired Americans who see their savings depleted. The average Social Security check is $1500 a month, but lean ground meat is pushing six bucks a pound. And by the end of the year, we all know, hamburger meat will cost even more. 

In other words, the inflation we are experiencing is not fuckin' transitory.

We now live in two Americas. Some Americans have a secure seat on the gravy train, and all of our congressional and corporate leaders are rich.

But the un-rich are worried about the future. We know that inflation is not under control, and we know it will worsen. More than half of American families don't even have $1,000 set aside for emergencies.

In my view, Americans will continue to believe that the economy is fine for another year or so. The government continues to print billions of dollars of new money every month, and no one worries about the $30 trillion national debt.

But we are all living on the brink of a financial collapse, and most of us know it--at least on a subconscious level.

And when food becomes scarce and increasingly expensive, we will have to face reality and change our ways.

People will have to stop paying dog walkers and walk their own dogs. Maybe pop will cancel his lawn service and start mowing the grass again. Many of us will stop going out to dinner and start looking for Spam recipes.

And God forbid, some of us will have to wean ourselves off craft beer and go back to drinking cheaper brews.  When I buy my first case of Old Milwaukee,  I will know the end is near.




Thursday, May 5, 2022

Will Americans Starve This Year? Probably Not, But Lets Plant Gardens Anyway

 A few days ago, Chris Martenson posted a blog essay titled "Will You Starve to Death This Year?" Martenson pointed out that escalating prices for natural gas have led to a global rise in fertilizer costs.  The price of diesel, which runs the world's farm tractors, has also shot upward dramatically, contributing to a sharp increase in food prices. A ten percent decline in global food production, Martenson argued, would be catastrophic.

Other people are beginning to worry about food. On television, I'm now beginning to see ads from emergency-food-supply companies--the outfits that sell food packets that can be safely stored for up to 25 years.  Is it time to stock up on canned goods?

I don't think Americans are in danger of starving to death--in the short term, at least. We live in a great country blessed with fertile soil, a temperate climate, and the advanced technology we need to feed a nation of 330 million people. 

In addition, the U.S. has a pretty good safety net to make sure people don't go hungry. The federal government's SNAP program (food coupons) is readily available to low-income families. Thousands of churches and nonprofit agencies deliver food to people who need it--including elderly shut-ins.

The American consumer is paying more for food, and we can't always get the food we prefer due to kinks in the supply chain. But nobody will die of hunger in the U.S., at least not in the near-term future.

Nevertheless, Americans should not take our food for granted. I've been reading about famines, and history tells us that people can starve to death even in countries that export food.

Several million people starved to death during Ireland's Potato Famine of 1845-1849, even though the British government exported food out of Ireland. Almost four million Ukrainians died of hunger in 1932-1933 due to Stalin's order to seize food stocks from peasant farmers, even while the Soviets were exporting food to Europe.

Anne Applebaum, who wrote a masterful history of the Ukrainian famine, described how people react when they don't get enough to eat. First, hungry people respond with anger and violence--especially if they have access to firearms. Eventually, however, starving people fall into lethargic apathy and quietly die.

In The Great Hunger, the best treatment of the Irish potato famine, Cecil Woodham-Smith explained how mass starvation always leads to epidemics. Disease invariably follows when the living become too weak to bury the dead.

I am also convinced from my reading that mass starvation inevitably leads to cannabilism, even in advanced societies. The starving people of Leningrad began eating the dead during the Nazi's 900-day siege of the city, as did the Ukrainians during the Holodomor. During World War II, German prisoners of war descended into cannibalism when the Russians penned them up and allowed them to starve to death. 

Americans have been blessed by abundant food for so long that we've forgotten its importance. We can eat whatever we want--from Russian caviar to Chicken McNuggets, and the grocery stores are always open.

Nevertheless, I think it is time for us to think about food.  We still have plenty to eat, but the grocery-store shelves no longer have everything we desire. And food prices have gone up alarmingly over the last few months.

Martenson concluded his sobering essay by urging his readers to plant gardens. I agree. I have been gardening for about ten years, and I now grow both a spring and a fall garden.

My little vegetable garden can't sustain my family for any length of time, but I am learning how to tend my crops, how to spot and treat diseases, and when to fertilize and harvest. 

Just as importantly, raising my own food is fulfilling on a spiritual level.  Planting a seed and seeing it grow into a bean plant that twines around a trellis and produces something I can eat is a miracle. And nothing tastes better than a home-grown tomato picked from my own garden. 

As Guy Clark observed in a famous song, "What would life be without homegrown tomatoes?"  Indeed it would not be nearly so sweet.