President Donald Trump has once again taken a firm stand against activities of dubious legality with an executive action. The move makes certain categories of federal student loan recipients ineligible for the Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF) program. This bold decision demonstrates the administration’s commitment to cutting down on illegal practices, marking a clear contrast to other figures in politics.
An important point to note is that one such political figure, the erstwhile Education Secretary, Linda McMahon, had pledged to retain the PSLF in its present form. This announcement came during her Senate confirmation hearing mere weeks before President Trump’s decision. This gives insight into the incoherent stance of political figures who wish to maintain a program without taking decisive steps to weed out its abuses.
The PSLF is a creation of Congress, designed to forgive the federal loan balances of those employed in public-sector jobs after a full decade’s worth of payments. Non-Profit organizations also fall within its purview. President Trump’s new executive action tasks Education Secretary McMahon with the responsibility of redefining ‘public service,’ specifically to exclude organizations involved in illegal activities.
Interestingly, the executive order lists the devastating and unsavory activities it’s targeting. These include support for terrorism; child abuse, namely, dreadful practices like chemical and surgical abuse of children, along with trafficking to so-called ‘transgender sanctuaries’. Other illicit activities include aiding and abetting illegal discrimination, violation of federal immigration laws, and a list of state law violations such as disorderly conduct, public nuisance, and obstruction of highways.
Unsurprisingly, critics are keen on warping the executive action into an attack on free speech rights. What they miss, however, is that the primary aim is to cut down on organizations supporting illegal activities. The Trump administration’s move is then framed as an attempt to deter public service workers via their debts, a narrative that conveniently overlooks the focus on illegality.
Persis Yu, the deputy executive director and managing counsel at the Student Borrower Protection Center, spins an interesting tale. Without a shred of evidence, Yu claims the executive action is an attempt to manipulate public service workers. This kind of rhetoric intentionally overlooks the administration’s focus on addressing illegal activities while suppresses the larger narrative.
Any mention of the Biden administration’s handling of the PSLF should come with a fair warning. Under President Joe Biden’s rule in 2021, the guidelines of PSLF were expanded. The result of these changes was a surge in the forgiveness of loans. A superficial observation of the situation might consider this a positive change.
Despite such claims, however, facts remain unimpressed. In a complete break from the strict and sensible policies of the Trump administration, the Biden-Harris Administration inflated the number of borrowers approved for PSLF from 7,000 to over a staggering million, with a massive $78.46 billion – all at the cost of the taxpayer.
Yu, however, advises caution, suggesting the Trump administration should rethink its stance on PSLF. He believes there are multiple ways to alter the administration of PSLF but refuting the fact that an executive action cannot redefine the law or alter qualifications. These claims seem symptomatic of the prevailing sentiment among critics who seem determined to undermine decisive and sensible action on the basis of pedantic arguments.
PSLF, it must be noted, is tarnished by a troubled history, further justifying calls for change. In a 2018 review, the U.S. Government Accountability Office found that applicants seeking information on if their jobs qualified for PSLF often ended up lost in limbo, as the Department of Education neglected to provide the managers with a list of eligible employers.
Inevitably, this caused confusion among would-be borrowers and led to a staggering rejection rate of 99% in 2018 for the PSLF loan forgiveness applications. The data tells a story of a program in desperate need of reform, a fact the critics choose to ignore.
The PSLF back-and-forth shows a clear contrast between the Trump and Biden administrations, with the latter favoring unchecked loan forgiveness at the expense of taxpayer dollars. This boils down to the type of leadership and governance we choose to endorse: one that prioritizes sensible economic policies or one that operates on unfettered spending.
It’s ultimately clear that the Trump administration, armed with a focus on lawfulness and financial responsibility, took a principled stance via this executive action. Sadly, this contrasts sharply with the Biden administration’s decision to expand PSLF rule which resulted in ballooning loan forgiveness.
Contrasting approaches to PSLF highlight the critical differences between the Trump and Biden administrations. The former is rooted in a firm stand against illegality and financial imprudence, while the latter is portrayed as enabling a surge in loan forgiveness with little regard for the consequences borne by taxpayers. This clear differentiation in approach reflects the broader philosophical divide between the two administrations.