- Joined
- Mar 21, 2005
- Messages
- 25,893
- Reaction score
- 12,484
- Location
- New York, NY
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Slightly Conservative
House Passes Sweeping Student-Loan-Market Overhaul - WSJ.com
The WSJ article is updated with the result, but this Wash post article has more details:
washingtonpost.com
I'm not sure I really understand what they're talking about doing here, so I'd appreciate an explanation from anyone else who has more details. Here are the things that I know:
1) Money doesn't come from thin air. If they're "saving $80b," it's coming out of something. It looks like it's coming from the private loan companies who provide most of the loans out there and will be then be redirected to Pell grants and other PR-friendly causes. The obvious implication is that this will result in private lenders raising their rates.
2) I really, really don't like the idea of the federal government becoming the only originator.
I have an asston of private loans through citibank. They had a 0% origination fee and are accumulating interest at rates between 2.25% and 2.75%.
I also have an asston of stafford loans and PLUS loans. The stafford loans have a 0% origination fee and are accumulating interest at 6.5% interest, though some are subsidized til graduation. The PLUS loans had a 3% origination fee and are accumulating interest at 8.5%.
I know which one of those two arrangements I prefer.
The House of Representatives Thursday easily passed legislation to effectively end private lender involvement in the student-loan market, establishing the federal government as the sole provider of college loans.
The bill introduces sweeping changes to the U.S. higher education system, and serves as the third central plank of President Barack Obama's domestic agenda.
Similar to the continuing efforts at overhauling health care, the changes to the federal government's higher education policies would have a serious impact on the bottom line for private sector players currently serving the marketplace.
The WSJ article is updated with the result, but this Wash post article has more details:
washingtonpost.com
Currently, the federal government supports college lending in two major ways. Under the Federal Family Education Loan Program, which dates to the 1960s-era Great Society, it subsidizes banks and other entities that lend students money at favorable rates, and it guarantees lenders against loss if students default. Under the William D. Ford Federal Direct Loan Program, launched in the early 1990s, the government itself is the lender.
Education Department data show that 4,463 postsecondary schools participated in the public-private program in the past academic year, accounting for about $74 billion in loans. The direct lending program had 1,742 participating schools in the same span, with $22 billion in loan volume. If the House bill becomes law, new lending under the government-guaranteed program would end. Essentially, the government would become the sole originator of federal loans.
The core of the bill would transfer about $40 billion in savings to the Pell Grant program, which aids low- and moderate-income students. The maximum yearly award would rise from $5,350 per student to $5,550 next year and eventually to $6,900 in 2019, with the grants indexed to inflation starting in 2011. That would enable Democrats to claim a breakthrough for college affordability at a time of economic worry for many Americans.
"This is a can't-miss opportunity to do the right thing," said Rep. George Miller (D-Calif.), chairman of the Education and Labor Committee and chief architect of the bill. "Let's remember whose voices really matter here. It's time to listen to our students and our families."
But Republicans say the bill could backfire. "It is another government takeover, in this case of a $100 billion loan industry," said Rep. John Kline (Minn.), ranking Republican on the committee. He drew a parallel to the health-care debate, in which an expanded federal role is also at issue. "It's Congress stepping in and choosing the public option instead of the private option, the private-public partnership," Kline said. Two Republicans on the committee support the bill; most are opposed.
...
Among the provisions Democrats inserted into the bill are $10 billion to help community colleges, $8 billion to help states improve early-learning programs for children from birth to age 5, $4 billion to modernize and renovate public schools, $3 billion to bolster college access and completion, and $2 billion for historically black colleges and universities and other institutions serving minorities.
I'm not sure I really understand what they're talking about doing here, so I'd appreciate an explanation from anyone else who has more details. Here are the things that I know:
1) Money doesn't come from thin air. If they're "saving $80b," it's coming out of something. It looks like it's coming from the private loan companies who provide most of the loans out there and will be then be redirected to Pell grants and other PR-friendly causes. The obvious implication is that this will result in private lenders raising their rates.
2) I really, really don't like the idea of the federal government becoming the only originator.
I have an asston of private loans through citibank. They had a 0% origination fee and are accumulating interest at rates between 2.25% and 2.75%.
I also have an asston of stafford loans and PLUS loans. The stafford loans have a 0% origination fee and are accumulating interest at 6.5% interest, though some are subsidized til graduation. The PLUS loans had a 3% origination fee and are accumulating interest at 8.5%.
I know which one of those two arrangements I prefer.