Home > News > Will Obama’s Student Loan Plan Really Help Borrowers?

Comments 0 Comments

It seems that the Obama administration is finally ready to put its money where its mouth has been on the student-loan crisis.

The president announced that he will be taking certain executive actions to expand the relief programs the government has in place. One action would eliminate the absurdly limited eligibility standard that currently exists for federally-backed loan borrowers (right now, only loans drawn down between October 2007 and October 2011 are eligible). Once that happens, some five million more debtors will then be able to cap their monthly payments at 10% of household income.

Another action directs the Department of Education to renegotiate the agreements it has with third-party loan-servicers. The administration wants to offer subcontractors additional financial incentives to prevent more loans from slipping into delinquency status.

The president is also calling for passage of a bill that’s sponsored by Senator Elizabeth Warren. The legislation would permit all borrowers—whether or not they are experiencing financial distress, and without regard for the original sources of the loans—to refinance their debts at current rates through the Federal Direct Loan program.

What This Really Means for Borrowers

Now for the disclaimers.

To start, the president’s actions have a distressingly long lead time for enactment—18 months—which isn’t terribly helpful to those who currently reside in their parents’ basements, are putting off purchasing cars and houses, and even marriage.

Next, there’s the matter of all those who’ve previously applied for or have already been granted relief, or who are otherwise excluded because one or more of their monthly payments are past-due. If the government’s offer to help is truly sincere, these borrowers must also be included, if for no other reason than it makes little sense to leave behind those most desperately in need of assistance.

As for renegotiating existing third-party loan-servicing agreements, pardon me, but isn’t preventing delinquencies and defaults a fundamental element of a loan servicer’s job? Rather than throwing more money at these folks so that they might do the work for which they are being paid in the first place, shouldn’t the government first enforce its existing standards, that is, if there are any? Unfortunately, no one can be sure because the ED has been less than forthcoming about its subcontracting arrangements.

And then there is the Warren bill: legislation that, given its call for additional taxation to cover the “cost” of the refinancing it proposes stands little chance of overcoming filibuster in the Senate or passage in the Republican-dominated House. But is that so-called cost really the problem here?

Let’s not forget that, as the program is currently funded, the government continues to reap substantial profits from its lending activities. In fact, even if the ED were to securitize the loans that currently reside on its balance sheet, the feds would still earn significant income at this juncture, without the additional taxation.

Perhaps the real issue is the extent to which all this income has already been taken into account within the context of the federal budget. And that’s without taking into consideration the even higher rates that new borrowers are likely to be charged beginning next month, thanks to last year’s legislation.

In sum, as well intentioned as the prospective executive actions and the Warren legislation may be, more work is needed on the former, and a more palatable construct is required for the latter. Otherwise, there will be little celebrating in basements across America.

More on Student Loans:

This story is an Op/Ed contribution to Credit.com and does not necessarily represent the views of the company or its affiliates.

Image: Dinic

Comments on articles and responses to those comments are not provided or commissioned by a bank advertiser. Responses have not been reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by a bank advertiser. It is not a bank advertiser's responsibility to ensure all posts and/or questions are answered.

Please note that our comments are moderated, so it may take a little time before you see them on the page. Thanks for your patience.

Credit.com receives compensation for the financial products and services advertised on this site if our users apply for and sign up for any of them.

Hello, Reader!

Thanks for checking out Credit.com. We hope you find the site and the journalism we produce useful. We wanted to take some time to tell you a bit about ourselves.

Our People

The Credit.com editorial team is staffed by a team of editors and reporters, each with many years of financial reporting experience. We’ve worked for places like the New York Times, American Banker, Frontline, TheStreet.com, Business Insider, ABC News, NBC News, CNBC and many others. We also employ a few freelancers and more than 50 contributors (these are typically subject matter experts from the worlds of finance, academia, politics, business and elsewhere).

Our Reporting

We take great pains to ensure that the articles, video and graphics you see on Credit.com are thoroughly reported and fact-checked. Each story is read by two separate editors, and we adhere to the highest editorial standards. We’re not perfect, however, and if you see something that you think is wrong, please email us at editorial team [at] credit [dot] com,

The Credit.com editorial team is committed to providing our readers and viewers with sound, well-reported and understandable information designed to inform and empower. We won’t tell you what to do. We will, however, do our best to explain the consequences of various actions, thereby arming you with the information you need to make decisions that are in your best interests. We also write about things relating to money and finance we think are interesting and want to share.

In addition to appearing on Credit.com, our articles are syndicated to dozens of other news sites. We have more than 100 partners, including MSN, ABC News, CBS News, Yahoo, Marketwatch, Scripps, Money Magazine and many others. This network operates similarly to the Associated Press or Reuters, except we focus almost exclusively on issues relating to personal finance. These are not advertorial or paid placements, rather we provide these articles to our partners in most cases for free. These relationships create more awareness of Credit.com in general and they result in more traffic to us as well.

Our Business Model

Credit.com’s journalism is largely supported by an e-commerce business model. Rather than rely on revenue from display ad impressions, Credit.com maintains a financial marketplace separate from its editorial pages. When someone navigates to those pages, and applies for a credit card, for example, Credit.com will get paid what is essentially a finder’s fee if that person ends up getting the card. That doesn’t mean, however, that our editorial decisions are informed by the products available in our marketplace. The editorial team chooses what to write about and how to write about it independently of the decisions and priorities of the business side of the company. In fact, we maintain a strict and important firewall between the editorial and business departments. Our mission as journalists is to serve the reader, not the advertiser. In that sense, we are no different from any other news organization that is supported by ad revenue.

Visitors to Credit.com are also able to register for a free Credit.com account, which gives them access to a tool called The Credit Report Card. This tool provides users with two free credit scores and a breakdown of the information in their Experian credit report, updated twice monthly. Again, this tool is entirely free, and we mention that frequently in our articles, because we think that it’s a good thing for users to have access to data like this. Separate from its educational value, there is also a business angle to the Credit Report Card. Registered users can be matched with products and services for which they are most likely to qualify. In other words, if you register and you find that your credit is less than stellar, Credit.com won’t recommend a high-end platinum credit card that requires an excellent credit score You’d likely get rejected, and that’s no good for you or Credit.com. You’d be no closer to getting a product you need, there’d be a wasted inquiry on your credit report, and Credit.com wouldn’t get paid. These are essentially what are commonly referred to as "targeted ads" in the world of the Internet. Despite all of this, however, even if you never apply for any product, the Credit Report Card will remain free, and none of this will impact how the editorial team reports on credit and credit scores.

Your Stories

Lastly, much of what we do is informed by our own experiences as well as the experiences of our readers. We want to tell your stories if you’re interested in sharing them. Please email us at story ideas [at] credit [dot] com with ideas or visit us on Facebook or Twitter.

Thanks for stopping by.

- The Credit.com Editorial Team