And now, the wait

Student loan ruling might come in June

Last week, the United States Supreme Court heard arguments for and against President Biden’s student-loan forgiveness plan. Dispatches say conservatives on the court “expressed skepticism” that the president had this kind of executive power. The reporters who follow these things say the court is expected to rule one way or the other in June. We’ll see.

Below is an editorial we first published in 2021, when Major Loan Forgiveness was first being seriously considered in Congress. If we say so ourselves, it still makes sense today:

Ahandful of Democratic leaders in Congress have asked that President Joe Biden write off student loans for all those millions who’ve taken them out. Or, apparently in the alternative, at least not resume federal student loan payments when they are scheduled to begin again in February.

Chuck Schumer, Elizabeth Warren and a congresswoman from Boston named Ayanna Pressley (D-Of Course) signed off on the letter to President Biden.

The student loan moratorium was implemented to give folks relief from payments during covid-19. Now that payments are scheduled to begin again, these lawmakers say these borrowers could be on the hook for billions.

We give you the second sentence in their letter to the president: “A new analysis, prepared at our request by experts from the Roosevelt Institute, found that the resumption of federal student loan payments — which is scheduled to occur 55 days from today when the coronavirus disease 2019 (covid-19) payment moratorium ends — will strip more than $85 billion from approximately 18 million American families over the next year.”

Did you catch that? Requiring American adults who took out loans to pay for their education would “strip” them of money. As if they never signed up for repayment. As if the government was taking something away from them, instead of providing them with a way to pay for their educations. This is what happens when certain politicians get ahold of language and bend it to their needs.

Where to begin? How about at the beginning: When people borrow money, it is expected they will pay it back. Must we send our betters in Washington a definition of the word “borrow”? We wonder if there could be an effort for the government to cancel all monthly car notes, or house notes, because such payments to the lenders amount to “stripping” families of needed cash.

Silly, of course. But no more silly than the idea that paying back student loans takes money out of the hands of good people to their detriment. With their educations, they should be able to get jobs that pay better than the average bear.

There have always been problems with the logic of the student-loan-forgiveness lobby. Including these questions: How about all those who’ve taken out — and paid back — student loans over the last six decades? Should they get a nice lumpsum back, too, all the better to pay them for all those years they made monthly payments?

If not, why not? Are they not entitled to government largesse simply because they were born earlier? What kind of message would this send to others who borrow in the American system(s)? And what is the next bank note/lease/contract that will be covered by the government, which is all of us?

And how is this not considered a redistribution of wealth, but in the opposite direction? For there would be a lot of noncollege plumbers and construction workers and factory workers who’d end up paying for the education of doctors and lawyers.

More from the letter: “Prior to the covid-19 payments pause, student loan borrowers paid an average of $393 per month toward their student loans — money that could not be spent on their families’ other needs.” And the $350$450-$550 that some families spend on car notes can’t be used on other needs, either. But they get a car out of the deal. Does this really need to be explained? Apparently it does.

“Nearly nine in 10 borrowers (88%) said that the student loan payment pause has been critical to their financial well-being during the pandemic.” Which is why it was implemented. But now that the world is awakening from the pandemic, it’s time for adults to pay bills again. And we’d bet that nine in 10 borrowers would tell pollsters that not paying the car note would be “critical to their financial well-being,” too.

“As the Roosevelt Institute analysis shows, restarting student loan payments will exacerbate the economic challenges facing millions of families. This data does show, however, that a comprehensive solution is needed: the cancellation of up to $50,000 of student debt would relieve an enormous burden from borrowers while pumping billions of dollars per year back into our national economy.” Canceling the mortgage payments would “relieve an enormous burden” from borrowers, too. Is that next on the wish list? It wouldn’t surprise.

The letter didn’t stop there. All the usual topics came up: People of color, those of lesser income, “student parents” and even veterans were listed as among those with default problems before the Great Payment Pause. By resuming payments, garnishments and tax refunds are back on the table. And omicron was mentioned, because it’s there.

Put aside for a moment the whole idea of paying back loans and keeping promises. Doubtless there are those who took the minimum loan while in college, worked in pizza joints to make ends meet, and did without sometimes. They ate ramen noodles and lived five to an off-campus apartment to save on room and board. Is the lesson here that they are dopes, and should’ve taken Uncle Sucker’s money when they had the chance?

Surely some people decided not to go to college in part, at least, because of the high costs involved. And they are perhaps working blue-collar jobs now. What does the country say to them? A Wall Street Journal poll recently found that 57% of Americans don’t agree with canceling student debt. Because it would be unfair to many of them.

But what, liberals in Congress worry?

They’re too busy rewarding financial irresponsibility. To prove it, read their own words.