Executive Authority to Forgive Student Loans Is Not So Simple Superficially, the question seems a simple one. Everyone agrees that the Secretary of Education is empowered to make adjustments on federal student loans. The debate turns on the precise meaning of provisions of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (HEA) which confer upon the Secretary the power to “consent to modification” of, and to “compromise, waive, or release,” amounts due on certain student loans. These powers are often referred to as the Secretary’s “compromise authority.” Advocates of broad executive authority to forgive student loans see in these provisions unbridled discretion—that is, plenary compromise authority. Under this view, the Secretary can forgive any amount of student debt, including debts of borrowers perfectly capable of repaying their loans. The alternative—and traditional—view is that these provisions grant only constrained compromise authority, available where borrowers lack the financial capacity to service their student loans or other equitable considerations warrant debt relief. The parameters of constrained compromise authority are not clearly defined. For example, it is not obvious under the traditional view the extent to which the COVID-19 pandemic could be deemed a factor warranting forgiveness for affected borrowers. Still, advocates of this interpretation stress the importance of some sort of individualized determination to justify forgiveness. The language of the HEA itself is ambiguous. Those favoring plenary compromise authority can focus on more open-ended language, such as the words “release” and “waive.” For traditionalists, the prominence of the word “compromise” in various parts of the HEA suggests a requirement of at least some sort of give-and-take that is absent in blanket forgiveness.
When it comes to career-training programs, for-profit schools don’t measure up, feds say A program is considered to lead to gainful employment if the annual loan payment of a typical graduate does not exceed 20 percent of their discretionary income or 8 percent of their total earnings. The variation in earnings is due in part to the programs offered at for-profit and public institutions. More than half of the people who attended public institutions completed certificates in higher-earning fields, such as nursing, compared with 17 percent of graduates of for-profit schools. A high percentage of graduates from for-profit programs received certificates to become cosmetologists, medical office assistants or massage technicians, earning less than $18,000 a year.
Department of Education's own internal legal opinion concluded that the Secretary does not have the power to do blanket dismissal of all student loans. I mean, we all get that Biden can put pressure on them to come up with another legal opinion or generate any opinion that is needed. But as of the time he took office, the Department's opinion was that the Secretary did not have that power. Secretary Of Education Cannot Forgive All Federal Student Loans https://www.forbes.com/sites/markka...ot-forgive-all-student-loans/?sh=dca956c7f279
Yep. I saw that- thank you- and it prompted me to look deeper or at other articles as well. I thought that the suggestions in some articles that it is sort of open to debate were a bit too generous. Apparently even the Department did too.
I believe Biden canceled those or many of them.Should have just let those stupid enough to go to those bull shit colleges default.Its long past overdue that they stop giving federal student loans to to those scam colleges.A friends wife is in HR for a huge company. She says they immediately throw away a resume that has a degree from a for profit college.
Biden pledged to forgive $10,000 in student loan debt. Here's what he's done so far Why Joe Biden Is Refusing to Cancel Student Loan Debt, Despite His Promises
It is one of those issues,where if Biden were doing well in other areas, and wanted to push some of this through or some amount of forgiveness by using political capital he could probably get something. Problem is- he has many other areas that also require ALL of his diminished capital along with parliamentiary gymnastics and outright threatening and/or trickery to get anything done. If he got something substantial passed, the next day all the seniors who supported him are going to pop up and say "what have you done for us through all your give-away programs. we have not seen a dime." As many pundits have properly pointed out, one of Biden's biggest problem is that he continually acts like he came to washington with a mandate. But he didn't. Everything is 50-5O and he is trying to do the biggest of government ventures with the smallest level of support. Not good. The other thing, and this may be into the weeds a bit, but one of the biggest problems that biden and the lefties will have is the "what are we going to do for an encore" issue. Some of these newcomers in Congress came at a time when- due to the pandemic and the progressive surge- that they expect to continue seeing billions every month after they articulate any problem at all. But that market is forming a top. Even if Build Back Broke does or did pass, it looks like it would take a lot to come again with more programs. Trying to get more milk out of the cow is plenty rough sledding already. That is a bit of a long-winded way of my trying to say that their style requires them to flop out some big dollars at mid-term time- when everything that is being funded in this time frame will be long forgotten. Not sure what they are going to do for an encore. What power do some of those squad and bernie and biden types have once the freebies dry up. Oh I see, they will campaign on more freebies with inflation having already taxed people - after Biden promised no taxes on anyone under 400k. What a mess.