Ballot Bailout
Joe gives Supremes and taxpayers the finger
WHEN the Supreme Court struck down Joe Biden’s attempt to unilaterally “cancel” (i.e., force taxpayers to absorb) $400 billion in student loans and blasted the president for overstepping his power by trying to circumvent Congress, he listened and, like a serious statesman, acknowledged his authority’s limits and tried to get the legislative branch to pass his agenda, as the Constitution demands.
Just kidding. Congress, which has the “power of the purse,” has repeatedly rejected Biden’s plans to force taxpayers to eat the loss for millions of Americans’ student loans.
But instead of taking “No” for an answer, the president — who, recall, was supposed to put the “grown-ups back in charge” and restore “rule of law” — just keeps trying to cancel the debt anyway, first through a backdoor giveaway vastly expanding income-based repayment systems and now through another sweeping forgiveness proposal.
Under Biden’s latest scheme, announced Monday, roughly 25 million more Americans will see student-loan windfalls, including the “cancellation” of interest owed for households earning as much as $240,000 a year, cancellation for anyone who’s had student loans for a long time and a number of other targeted relief efforts.
“President Biden from Day One has worked to fix the student loan system and make sure higher education is a ticket to the middle class — not a barrier to opportunity — because he knows that debt cancellation not only benefits borrowers, it benefits the entire economy,” the White House stated.
This is, as Joe loves to say, malarkey.
The real rationale behind this continued bailout push has nothing to do with economics or “fixing the system.” It is a raw, cynical, blatant gambit to bribe young voters to get back on the Biden train after many have become increasingly disillusioned with the administration over its position on the Israel-Hamas war.
This isn’t some theory; it’s apparent from the Biden administration’s own actions.
To tout the initiative Monday, Biden himself went to Wisconsin, while Vice President Kamala Harris went to Pennsylvania, second gentleman Douglas Emhoff went to Arizona, and Education Secretary Miguel Cardona went to New York.
Notice anything about those states? Except for New York, they all just happen to be swing states that will prove vital in November’s presidential election.
Biden is really not hiding the fact he’s intentionally trying to work around the Supreme Court and Congress to abuse the powers of his office to bribe young voters at taxpayers’ expense — all with a policy that solves nothing and costs everyday Americans dearly.
Remember, there’s no such thing as student-debt “cancellation.” Almost all student loans are owed to the federal government, meaning that if taxpayers aren’t repaid, we’re on the hook for the difference via more taxes or debt.
So every dollar Biden “generously” gives out in “relief” to college graduates comes directly or indirectly out of the pockets of working Americans who didn’t go to college, already paid off their loans or made smart choices to avoid debt.
What’s more, simply forcing taxpayers to eat the loss for people’s loans does nothing to address the very real problem of exorbitant tuition rates.
It’s essentially putting a BandAid on a bullet hole.
It might even worsen the problem, as colleges may respond to the administration’s repeated bailout efforts by further jacking up their tuition prices.
Biden is doing all this and essentially giving the Supreme Court the middle finger.
Rather than accept the limits of his power after his last defeat or try to persuade Congress to support his agenda, he’s simply seeking to exploit a different old statute to work around the system.
And if this effort, too, eventually gets struck down by the Supreme Court, well, it’ll probably be after November!
It’s simple: The president is touring the country to brag about wasting our money to bribe young voters while circumventing our constitutional order and making our actual problems worse.
With a campaign like that, who needs opposition research?