Crocodile Tears: Congress Tinkers With Bankruptcy Code But Forgets Student Debtors

 President Biden signed the Bankruptcy Threshold Adjustment and Technical Corrections Act yesterday, and congressional leaders are patting themselves on the back. 

According to Senator Chuck Grassley, one of the Senate bill's sponsors, the new law will remove some hurdles to the bankruptcy process and "assist small businesses and working families to weather financial hardship and emerge stronger."

Senator John Cornyn, another sponsor, agreed. "For small businesses and families who fought their way through the pandemic and are now facing economic hardship, our complicated bankruptcy process can be another barrier to survival. I'm glad we could come together on this reprieve from burdensome [Bankruptcy Code] requirements . . . .

That's all bullshit. As the law's title says, this legislation does nothing more than make "some technical correction" to the Bankruptcy Code, and the law expires in two years.

If Congress is so interested in the welfare of working Americans, why doesn't it tackle the student-loan crisis--the $1.7 trillion elephant in the room?

Instead of tinkering with the Bankruptcy Code, why not remove the "undue hardship" language that prevents most distressed student borrowers from discharging their loans in bankruptcy?

If that task is too daunting, why not at least allow Parent Plus borrowers to discharge their student loans in the bankruptcy courts? Why not allow people who are overburdened by private student loans to shed that debt through the bankruptcy process?

President Biden hints that he will forgive student-loan debt to the tune of $10,000, an amount so small that the NAACP calls it a "slap in the face." 

Meanwhile, Congress pretends to care about the little guy, but it has done nothing substantive to address the student loan crisis, which grows bigger by the day. It hasn't even banned the Department of Education from garnishing the Social Security checks of elderly student-loan defaulters.

Our political leaders cry crocodile tears over the student debtor's plight, but they won't do anything significant to bring relief because the higher education industry likes the status quo.

Summer Reading Suggestions: Dip Into Apocalyptic Literature

 Summer is here, and everyone is looking for an enticing novel to read while on vacation. Most of us want a page-turner--something vacuous but exciting, a book we can read on the beach while sipping a tropical cocktail.

The summer of 2022 is different from the summers of the recent past. Inflation is rising, and most of us feel that we are only beginning to see substantial price increases in food and staples. Gas prices are at historic highs. It seems like everyone is unhappy, anxious, and fretful. What lies ahead?

So--why not read some apocalyptic literature to help us focus on what may well be America's future? Here are my suggestions:

First, I urge everyone to read James Howard Kunstler's World Made By Hand novels. Kunstler's books are set in upstate New York during the post-petroleum age. He describes a nation that has dropped back into the nineteenth century with people riding horses instead of driving cars and lighting their homes with candles rather than lightbulbs.

Before diving into Kunstler's novels, I suggest you read The Long Emergency, his best-known nonfiction work. In this book, Kunstler argues that the petroleum-based economy is ending and that so-called renewable energy (wind turbines, solar panels, and such) will not allow us to maintain our lavishly materialistic lifestyle.

The Long Emergency is very persuasive. Kunstler convinced me that our gasoline-driven world is not sustainable. I fear our future will be bleaker than progressive voices predict. We are more likely to be raising chickens than driving electric cars.

I also recommend reading some of John Wesley Rawls' apocalyptic novels.  Rawls' books imagine life in a world after the global economy collapses. Violence breaks out all across the United States, and an international, fascist military force stamps out democracy and individual freedoms.

What I like best about Rawls' books are the technical details. For example, he provides a recipe for making napalm out of styrofoam and describes how to harden a suburban home against a terrorist attack. His books even have glossaries.

Rawls is a prolific writer, and I recommend you begin by reading these four novels: Patriots,  Survivors, Expatriots, and Liberators. If you read all four of these books, I predict you will buy 2,000 rounds of .22 ammunition and a 10/22 Ruger rifle with a camouflage finish.

William Forstchen is another master of the apocalyptic genre. One Second After describes life in Black Mountain, North Carolina, after one of America's enemies set off nuclear bombs in the earth's upper atmosphere. These explosions trigger an electromagnetic pulse that shuts down all electronic devices--including vehicles and electrically powered machinery.

As food runs short, Forstchen's town officials begin rationing, and looters and arsonists are summarily shot. Large terroristic gangs sustain themselves by cannibalism, and the town organizes a militia made up primarily of college students that fights the terrorists in a bitter battle to the death.  

Finally, I recommend people to read Cormac McCarthy's dark and harrowing book, The Road.  McCarthy's apocalyptic environment is not drawn as sharply as those sketched out by Kunstler, Rawls, and Forstchen. Still, he describes a grey, ashen world in which the sun no longer shines and crops cannot grow--a perpetual nuclear winter. It is a harrowing book that ends with a bare flicker of hope.

Americans should read all four of these authors because they sketch out for us--to one degree or another--America's future. We should pay heed and prepare for it.

I, for one, went to the grocery store and bought four cans of Spam.

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.

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.

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 

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.

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?