Once again, the Biden Administration is demonstrating its affinity for misguided financial band-aids with its latest thoughtless proposition for student loan cancelation. This newest endeavor, announced last Friday, ascertains to provide liberation to delinquent borrowers grappling with issues ranging from dizzying medical expenses to towering child care costs. This scheme, however, is nothing but a convenient veil for Biden’s multitude of failed attempts at canceling student loans, making it a longstanding and laughable endeavor marred by legal contentions from Republican territories.
Undeniably, this proposal reeks of a desperate attempt to establish some traction in his beleaguered administration, as it is Biden’s third venture at student loan forgiveness. His original proposition got mercilessly struck down by the Supreme Court last year, and another ludicrous idea wound up getting temporally paused by a federal judge stationed in Missouri.
Realistically speaking, this current proposition can be seen as nothing more than a futile attempt at monopoly politics. The rule is accompanied by a string of requirements for actualization, which begin to seem as hazy as the likelihood of its realization before the end of Biden’s term in a mere three months. This controversial proposal, like the previous ones, is certain to bring forth a tidal wave of disputes from conservatives rightfully arguing its unconstitutionality and ethical imbalance.
Regardless of the eventual legality of this misguided plan, the Education Department argues for the ability to autonomously cancel the loans of those borrowers deemed to possess an 80% possibility of defaulting within the ensuing two years. Arbitrary reviews could assist others in determining their eligibility, but this hardly feels like a measured policy designed to inherently help student borrowers.
Intricately designed to provide relief to borrowers who are deemed unlikely to serve their financial obligations, this rule could potentially enhance the debt of about 8 million Americans. However, the determined eligible groups for this rule, such as those with unforeseen medical bills, elevated costs of child care, burdened by the expense of caring for chronically ill relatives, or financially crippled by natural disasters, appear arbitrarily bundled to justify the action.
The proposal entails the utilization of varying elements to assess the prospects of a borrower’s default. It is the epitome of a misguided system. Revolving around factors such as household income, age, reception of public benefits, and the total debt, not solely restricted to student loan debt, it’s an exercise in overreach. Curiously so, it leaves room for evaluators to hinge their judgments on ‘any other indicators of hardship identified by the Secretary,’ leading us to ponder the defining limit of this arbitrary rule.
The department’s tactics for loan forgiveness seem loosely based on the fact that a loan typically lands in default if it has been untouched for roughly nine months. But that would mean an estimated million borrowers per annum would benefit from Biden’s policy, cutting loose payments the system is deemed unlikely to retrieve. This denotes a system that favors write-offs over fiscal responsibility.
Before finalization, the proposal is due to undergo a 30-day public commentary phase, in what seems like a cruel attempt to give the illusion of democratic process. It keeps faith in a final roll-out of this inception as late as 2025. But the definite future of this proposal is as fickle as Biden’s tenure with a mere two weeks separating him from the upcoming presidential elections.
Notably absent in this entire discussion has been Vice President Kamala Harris. As the Democratic nominee remains silent about her plans for student debt cancellation in the event of election, one cannot help but ponder her positions. Is she too, ready to buy into this unfathomable forgiveness scheme?
Republican nominee Donald Trump has unflinchingly called for what it is: an unjust and illegitimate attempt at playing hero. As Trump’s stance illuminates the inherent flaws in Biden’s propositions, it further amplifies the voracious absurdity of the current administration’s decision-making.
This entire fiasco poses a question. How much longer will the Biden administration persist in peddling these controversial, deeply under-thought ideas that offer more contention than salvation? The proposition seems to center around the unsubstantiated notion that loan forgiveness is a fitting solution for the debt crisis. But the proposition remains failing to tackle the root issue: economic instability propagated by false promises and policies.
Can this administration not see the forest for the trees? It seems obsessed with introducing temporary solutions to a problem begging for a sustainable, long-term solution, leaving the hard-working taxpayers to ultimately pickup the bill.
At the end of the day, the constant push for these loan cancelation proposals perfectly illustrates the Biden administration’s consistent pattern for flawed policy introductions. It’s a remark on the administration’s inability to adequately and accurately address an issue that is deeply affecting the lives of countless Americans. Rather than seeking to truly alleviate the sources and consequences of this debt crisis, the administration continues to manufacture policies that aren’t solutions so much as they are band-aids that may end up causing more harm than good.