Dear Editor: One of the many news items creating recent controversy is the federal tuition loan forgiveness program. As in many cases, the history of this legislation is complex and deserves more thought than mere partisan sound bites and social media memes.
Americans currently owe more than a trillion dollars in federal student loans. How this came to be can be attributed to many factors, but skyrocketing college costs, coupled with predatory lenders charging exorbitant interest rates are clearly in the mix. Many of us paid for college over time, but “back in our day”, tuition was 1/60 of what it is today. And lucrative jobs after graduating were more abundant. Over the past two decades, our economy has become much harsher for adults under 40.
In this program, individuals who make less than $125K a year will be allowed a total of $10K in loan forgiveness ($20K for Pell recipients). This is not a program giving the “lazy rich kids” a kick back. This is a targeted life ring for people who are drowning. More than a third of those people in the bottom wealth quartile have such debt, as opposed to the 6% of those in the upper 10%. And this debt is disproportionate to people of color. The pandemic and subsequent economic fallout exacerbated the dire situation among these people. Many of them have been unable to finish their education, thus becoming “under-employable”, if not jobless.
Several of the loudest political critics of the program are those who themselves benefited from PPP (Paycheck Protection Program) loans and/or have filed for bankruptcy multiple times. It is hypocritical to be ok with helping to bail out/subsidize farmers, banks, oil companies, chip makers, telecoms, defense contractors and auto companies (as well as passing a huge tax break for corporations and billionaires) and not want to invest in our next generation. Helping those struggling to come up for air will eventually help us all.
Systemic problems, including the escalating cost of higher education, trends toward attending “for-profit” institutions, failures in occupational guidance at the secondary level, and regulation of predatory lending need to be addressed, of course. But as those who believe “a rising tide floats all boats”, we say look at the historical context, the data on education, income, and employment inequality and the possibilities of all solutions to a problem. Oh, and have some heart.