Advertisement

Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Friday, November 11, 2022

Millions of Americans celebrated when President Joe Biden announced in August up to $20,000 in federal student loan forgiveness -- but now the move has faced setbacks in the federal courts, leaving borrowers wondering if they'll ever see relief.

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

" A Texas-based judge ruled Thursday that Biden's loan relief plan exceeds his level of authority and needs Congressional approval"

LMAO

All those votes bought on an IOU.

#1 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2022-11-11 08:22 PM | Reply

We're not even done counting votes and this.

#2 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2022-11-11 08:23 PM | Reply

---- off, loser.

#3 | Posted by LegallyYourDead at 2022-11-11 08:37 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

From what I've read the Biden admin isn't going to appeal. It was always a vote buying gambit and they got good participation from Gen Z. Misssion accomplished.

#4 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-11-11 08:39 PM | Reply

I think legally your dead might cry.

#5 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-11-11 08:54 PM | Reply

I think you're an incompetent ----.

#6 | Posted by LegallyYourDead at 2022-11-11 09:02 PM | Reply

All of your phony aliases.

#7 | Posted by LegallyYourDead at 2022-11-11 09:02 PM | Reply

rom what I've read the Biden admin isn't going to appeal. It was always a vote buying gambit and they got good participation from Gen Z. Misssion accomplished.

#4 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

Hey look the lying pos gets caught lying
Again

www.cnn.com

The Department of Justice immediately appealed to the 5th US Circuit Court of Appeals.

#8 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-11-11 09:06 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

I think you're an incompetent ----.

#6 | POSTED BY LEGALLYYOURDEAD AT 2022-11-11 09:02 PM | FLAG:

Most of us around here know you're a ------ hack that can't even hold your own. You're like a Pussoir with a new handle, loser.

#9 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2022-11-11 09:16 PM | Reply

Look at all the republicans cheering US citizens being reburdened with 10 to 20K in debt.

Weird party them republicans.

#10 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-11-11 09:34 PM | Reply

#10 | POSTED BY TRUTHHURTS

Reburdened? What does that mean?

Those "reburdened" were conned by the Lumper Democrats like TonyRoma, and SpeaksSofty, throw in a Snoofy or two.

And you apparently...

They thank you for voting for us! Now ---- off!
~ Joe Biden

#11 | Posted by oneironaut at 2022-11-11 09:47 PM | Reply

"You're like a Pussoir with a new handle, loser."

Remind us of your previous handle(s).

#12 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-11-11 09:57 PM | Reply

#10. It's because the move was unconstitutional. I know you don't give a rip about that but it still matters.

#13 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-11-11 10:22 PM | Reply

Yep, keep celebrating, and then wonder why the younger generation thinks of you as --------.

You are literally celebrating people being inflicted with debt.

#14 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-11-11 10:26 PM | Reply

Remind us again of what the republican's policy is on debt relief?

#15 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-11-11 10:29 PM | Reply

In fact, the judge claimed it was one of the largest executive branch overreaches in the "history of the United States."

LOL what a tool.

A young Trump appointee and, worse, an Aggie.

I'm betting this gets tossed.

#16 | Posted by jpw at 2022-11-11 10:36 PM | Reply

From what I've read the Biden admin isn't going to appeal. It was always a vote buying gambit and they got good participation from Gen Z. Misssion accomplished.

#4 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

You didn't even read the article ...

The Department of Justice has filed an appeal on behalf of the Biden Administration against U.S. District Judge Mark Pittman, whose ruling led to the most recent pause of the program.

www.ed.gov

If you want to be taken more seriously, don't be so blatantly intellectually lazy.

#17 | Posted by jpw at 2022-11-11 10:40 PM | Reply

" Remind us again of what the republican's policy is on debt relief?
#15 | POSTED BY TRUTHHURTS AT 2022-11-11 10:29 PM | FLAG: "

Simple. It must go through congress.

#20 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-11-11 11:05 PM | Reply

42 million borrowers, $20k each, that's a little less than a trillion dollars. Why should Congress have to get involved in that?

#21 | Posted by Miranda7 at 2022-11-11 11:29 PM | Reply

42 million borrowers, $20k each, that's a little less than a trillion dollars. Why should Congress have to get involved in that?

#21 | POSTED BY MIRANDA7

Liar

As a result of Student Debt Relief, millions of borrowers will no longer have to make repayments on their loans and millions more will be able to substantially reduce their repayments. The Department estimates that, over the next 10 years, the program will cost on average $30 billion annually.

www.ed.gov

Iow pocket change

#22 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-11-11 11:37 PM | Reply

Simple. It must go through congress.

#20 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

it already did dumbass:

www.warren.senate.gov

Is administrative debt cancellation legal?
Yes, Congress has already granted the Secretary of Education the legal authority to broadly cancel
student debt under section 432(a) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1082(a), which grants
the Secretary the authority to modify, "... compromise, waive, or release any right, title, claim, lien, or
demand, however acquired, including any equity or any right of redemption."
The Harvard Law Project on Predatory Student Lending has consulted the statutory and regulatory
framework governing federal student loan programs administered by the U.S. Department of Education,
as well as the framework and controlling interpretations of the budgetary structure of these programs,
and has concluded in this memo that broad or categorical debt cancellation or modification would be a
lawful and permissible exercise of the Secretary of Education's authority under existing law

The ------- administration even did this already:

In March 2020, prior to the passage of the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Securities Act, the
Education Department revealed to the press that Secretary DeVos had "exercised her [compromise]
authority under Sec. 432(a)(6) of the [Higher Education Act] to allow a temporary waiver of interest
based on the unique and special facts presented by the COVID-19 pandemic interruption and the
resulting declaration of a National Emergency by the President." According to reports, the Trump
administration, when asked about the legal authorities explained, "That portion of the law gives the
education secretary the authority to enforce, pay, compromise, waive, or release' debts." In effect,
Secretary DeVos canceled student debt (unpaid interest) in 2020 for the entire federal student loan
portfolio pursuant to the same modification and compromise authority discussed above.

So, iow republicans said that the executive branch had the authority when there was a republican president. When a democrat is president republicans say the president doesn't have the authority.

But, yeah you go ahead and cheer millions of Americans getting saddled with more debt. that is a winning strategy

#23 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-11-11 11:44 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Do the math, Troll 42,800,000 x $20,000= $856,000,000,000.

www.google.com

#24 | Posted by Miranda7 at 2022-11-11 11:51 PM | Reply

" iow republicans said that the executive branch had the authority when there was a republican president. When a democrat is president republicans say the president doesn't have the authority."

Wait until they tell you Mike Pence can unilaterally overturn the election results, but Kamala can't!

#25 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-11-11 11:54 PM | Reply

Saddled with MORE debt? That makes no sense.

Further, Congress did not issue an appropriation for that money. Your link is -------- just like you.

#26 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-11-11 11:54 PM | Reply

" 42 million borrowers, $20k each"

1. Not every borrower qualifies.
2. Not every borrower owes/gets 20k.

Care to use Actual Math, instead of Republican Math?

#27 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-11-11 11:57 PM | Reply

" Congress did not issue an appropriation for that money."

What a riot.

Please link to where Congress "appropriated" $2.3 Trillion for Trump's tax giveaways.

#28 | Posted by Danforth at 2022-11-11 11:59 PM | Reply

" Please link to where Congress "appropriated" $2.3 Trillion for Trump's tax giveaways.

#28 | POSTED BY DANFORTH AT 2022-11-11 11:59 PM | FLAG: "

Easy. Congress passed legislation that the president signed into law. Civics101.

Here, this might help ... .

#29 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-11-12 12:05 AM | Reply

www.youtube.com

#30 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-11-12 12:06 AM | Reply

Do the math, Troll 42,800,000 x $20,000= $856,000,000,000.
www.google.com

#24 | POSTED BY MIRANDA7

The outstanding federal loan balance is $1.617 trillion and accounts for 92.7% of all student loan debt.

Your contention is biden is forgiving half of the student loan debt. LOL!!1

I'll trust the Dept of Education and not your piss poor math

#31 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-11-12 12:09 AM | Reply

Saddled with MORE debt? That makes no sense.
Further, Congress did not issue an appropriation for that money. Your link is -------- just like you.

#26 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

You are an idiot.

Yes, saddled with more debt. the debt that was forgiven by biden is being returned by a radical republican judge.

Congress did appropriate the loans stupid. Congress passed a law that gave authority to the Executive Branch on administering the funds

Here is the law

www.govinfo.gov

Here is the applicable language of the law "enforce, pay, compromise, waive, or release any right, title, claim, lien, or demand, however acquired, including any equity or any right of redemption."

Right there congress gave the Executive Branch in the form of the Dept of Education the authority to to WAIVE OR RELEASE claim to ... equity or any right of redemption..." IoW they gave the DoE the authority to waive or forgive the loans.

SOMETHING -------- DOE said they could do and is clear from the law. You pissant.

#32 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-11-12 12:13 AM | Reply

#27 I'm not a Republican and that's not a Republican source. What is your problem with the linked source? My math is a very simple equation using documented facts. Of course there are many variables, nobody can calculate the cost of this program with precision,, but $42 million is total number of borrowers (just Federal) and average is $37k debt, so most of them probably DO owe $20 k I don't think the numbers I used are unreasonable.

For the sake of this argument, let's ignore all the disclaimers associated with the Ed.gov numbers and use their figure of$300 billion ... ..should the President be able to give that much money to a special interest group without Congressional approval?

#33 | Posted by Miranda7 at 2022-11-12 12:20 AM | Reply

Again, here is the language from the federal law:

SEC. 432. 20 U.S.C. 1082 LEGAL POWERS AND RESPONSIBILITIES.
(a) GENERAL POWERS."In the performance of, and with respect
to, the functions, powers, and duties, vested in him by this part,
the Secretary may"

(6) enforce, pay, compromise, waive, or release any right,
title, claim, lien, or demand, however acquired, including any
equity or any right of redemption.

IoW the Secretary of the Department of Education has the authority to forgive student loans

#34 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-11-12 12:20 AM | Reply

#32. You're full of it per usual. The Biden admin cited the HEROES Act, not the garbage you are citing.

#35 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-11-12 12:21 AM | Reply

For the sake of this argument, let's ignore all the disclaimers associated with the Ed.gov numbers and use their figure of$300 billion ... ..should the President be able to give that much money to a special interest group without Congressional approval?

#33 | POSTED BY MIRANDA7

Yes, because that is what the law says and permits.

BTW, without delving too deeply into the topic, I would imagine that congress designates similar spending to agencies ALL THE TIME. It is the only way the federal government or any government could work. Congress appropriates money and specifies how the money will be spent and delegates the authority to different entities to spend the money. Congress need not be involved with every single spending decision, that would be unworkable given the millions of financial transactions completed daily.

And again, the plain language of the law CLEARLY states that the DoE Secretary has the authority to waive or release any right or claim i.e. a loan.

IoW when accepting a loan the borrower is signing a claim recoverable by the federal government. That is being waived.

And again, the ------- administration was going to do THE EXACT SAME THING. THE EXACT SAME THING. read that again, the ------- administration was going to forgive interest during the Covid emergency. That is the exact same thing, just in a smaller $ amount.

#36 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-11-12 12:27 AM | Reply

#32. You're full of it per usual. The Biden admin cited the HEROES Act, not the garbage you are citing.

#35 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

The heroes act modified the 1965 law clarifying the powers of the secretary. So, iow, duh and you're an idiot.

#37 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-11-12 12:31 AM | Reply

not the garbage you are citing.

#35 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

LOL

the "garbage" I cited is the law establishing the federal higher education loan program you dumbass.

#38 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-11-12 12:33 AM | Reply

The HEROES Act was passed in response to 9/11. It had nothing to do with student loans you dumb ---

#39 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-11-12 12:33 AM | Reply

To me, this is no different than if the President announced he was "forgiving" up to $100,000 of all Federally backed mortgages. While I would be delighted to suddenly own my house free and clear, I would still believe it was an overreach for a President to do that, and ethically questionable just prior to an election.

#40 | Posted by Miranda7 at 2022-11-12 12:34 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

But, again, you die on the hill of more debt for the lower and middle class, that should be a winning strategy for you.

#41 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-11-12 12:35 AM | Reply

The HEROES Act was passed in response to 9/11. It had nothing to do with student loans you dumb ---

#39 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

Wow, just wow.

I mean the name is Higher Education Relief Opportunities for Students Act of 2003'' so student loans are sort of in the name.

#42 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-11-12 12:38 AM | Reply

To me, this is no different than if the President announced he was "forgiving" up to $100,000 of all Federally backed mortgages. While I would be delighted to suddenly own my house free and clear, I would still believe it was an overreach for a President to do that, and ethically questionable just prior to an election.

#40 | POSTED BY MIRANDA7

Biden campaigned on it.

------- was going to do the same thing (was preempted by Covid relief), and later actually did do it (interest payment relief)

So, no, not ethically questionable. More like a campaign promise fulfilled. More like the effective implementation of a concept that has bi-partisan support (or at least did when an R was doing the forgiveness).

But now a D is doing it, it is suddenly unconstitutional and unethical.

#43 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-11-12 12:41 AM | Reply

#42. It's tied to extreme crisis. And it's designed to be very targeted. Two different courts have smacked Biden down on this.

#44 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-11-12 12:43 AM | Reply

Here is something funny and I don't know whether it is actually applicable as I don't know if the loans have actually been forgiven yet but,

"Finally, the law does not give the Secretary of Education the power to reinstate student loans after they have been cancelled. That would take an Act of Congress"

#45 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-11-12 12:44 AM | Reply

#42. It's tied to extreme crisis. And it's designed to be very targeted. Two different courts have smacked Biden down on this.

#44 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

Radical right wing justices, so that does not scare me.

Again, yes the Heroes act was tied to emergencies-Covid and the "recession" certainly meet the definition of hardship (Covid did for a republican president-who again, DID THE EXACT SAME THING), but again, the authority arises from the 1965 law, establishing the student loan program.

Or course the elephant in the room is-who is harmed by student debt forgiveness?

#46 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-11-12 12:47 AM | Reply

I don't care which side does it, vote buying is always wrong, and there is NO case to be made for singling out student debtors as a group deserving of special handouts not available to others. Those with higher education degrees were less adversely impacted by COVID than other groups, and already benefit from very low unemployment and a salary differential, (compared to less educated peers), that is more than sufficient to cover the costs of their college loan payments.

Who is harmed by debt forgiveness? The taxpayers who pay for it, of course. Which is everybody else, including the billions of blue collar and service workers who couldn't afford to go to college at all, and were MORE impacted by COVID and the recession than college grads. How do you think THEY feel about not qualifying for the $20,000 loan bailout their boss gets, while they struggle to make their rent and car payment? What about folks about to lose their homes to foreclosure, where is their debt forgiveness? The elderly trying to pay for prescriptions and buy food on fixed incomes while inflation soars, the list goes on and on.

A lot of people needed help throughout the pandemic and many still do, arguably Biden chose the least vulnerable among them for the biggest big bail outs. That was no accident, it was pure politics.

It is targeted towards a special interest group, (Student loan debtors), a group that was disproportately NOT affected by COVID or the current recession.

#47 | Posted by Miranda7 at 2022-11-12 01:42 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

Remind us again of what the republican's policy is on debt relief?

Posted by truthhurts

INCREASE IT WITH TAX CUTS AND THEN SOME MORE TAX CUTS!

(Otherwise, we don't talk about it unless it's a Dem president we left a mountain of debt to so we can slash social safety nets we say we can't afford since we're giving so much to corps. and wealthy individuals)

#48 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2022-11-12 02:21 AM | Reply

Above is the GOP's policy on debt, not debt relief.

If they actually cared about debt relief, they wouldn't have passed trillions in new tax cuts when they had the whole shebang 2017-2019.

#49 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2022-11-12 02:31 AM | Reply

Your whataboutism defections don't work on me because I'm not a Republican and I didn't support the Republican bailouts either ... ... .can we talk about the actual subject of college debt forgiveness?

Why do people with Masters degrees, (who have already had at least two years of relief) need a debt relief "social safety net" to save them from their student loans, but a high school educated waitress doesn't a get debt relief "social safety net" to save her from her car loan? Can you explain that one?

#50 | Posted by Miranda7 at 2022-11-12 02:43 AM | Reply

We already went through all the relevant statistics about those eligible for this loan forgiveness, and Miranda obviously should read factual information instead of inventing worthless strawmen to fight senseless battles against. 40% of those receiving loan forgiveness never received degrees and 90% of relief recipients make less than $75,000 per year. 16% of those eligible already defaulted on their loans and a 1/3rd of those are senior citizens.

Many of the relief eligible didn't go to traditional schools, many went to trade or technical schools so some indeed are regular Janes and Joes, not "master degreed" eggheads. This program was no more designed to gain political votes than was every other wealth transfer policy the US government runs every single day of its existence, including farm subsidies, energy subsidies, targeted tax cuts, and other loan forgiveness programs like PPP which gave wealthy companies tax money allegedly to pay their workers during the pandemic, which many simply did not do and redirected said money into their own pockets.

The program was as targeted as a relief program can be to address the real problems of educational debt that burdens millions of Americans, young and old. Everyone pays taxes, so no one receiving relief is getting anything they themselves haven't help to fund in the first place.

The one thing I absolutely loathe about those who always criticize the few times government tries to address the needs of citizens who have less than most do is to forget that there is no such thing as a free lunch because every person pays many forms of taxation as a simple matter of living and consuming goods and services. It's inescapable. And what's worse, is that those who turn a blind eye to megacorporations not only making billions, but also paying little or 0 in federal taxes usually are the loudest critics.

#51 | Posted by tonyroma at 2022-11-12 08:10 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Sorry lefties but China Joe has indeed violated the constitution on this. The congress has control of the purse strings, not the executive branch. Go read the constitution, the three branches have specific duties. The President is not authorized to spend money unless it is approved by the congress. This is true no matter who is president, the judge made the right call.

#52 | Posted by gtjr at 2022-11-12 08:28 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

Sorry lefties but China Joe has indeed violated the constitution on this. The congress has control of the purse strings, not the executive branch. Go read the constitution, the three branches have specific duties. The President is not authorized to spend money unless it is approved by the congress. This is true no matter who is president, the judge made the right call.

#52 | POSTED BY GTJR

Here, let me explain to you why you are wrong.

Congress passed a law governing student loans (i.e. created student loans and how that program was to be implemented and the mechanisms by which the loans would be funded) i.e. congress "controlled the purse strings.

Congress, in that law, DELEGATED the power to forgive debt to the Secretary of the Department of Education.

A small clue for you-Congress does that delegation ALL THE TIME. Otherwise, the government couldn't function.

------- argued that the DoE had that power. ------- used that power to DO THE EXACT SAME THING that Biden did.

Keep in mind DEBT FORGIVENESS IS NOT NEW SPENDING. That point cannot be expressed enough. The money was spent. The cost of the student loan program varies over time and this is just another variation on the cost of the program, but again, DEBT FORGIVENESS IS NOT NEW SPENDING.

#53 | Posted by truthhurts at 2022-11-12 11:17 AM | Reply

Biden cited the HEROES Act, which requires a war or ongoing national emergency. There is no war, and the administration closed the Pandemic Door in May when it declared it would end Title 42 of the 1944 PHSA at the border because the Covid emergency had ended.

#54 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2022-11-12 11:39 AM | Reply

Just another example of Dems enacting their plans to help Americans and republicans doing everything they can to block and obstruct that help from getting to Americans.

Republicans apparently have NO plans to help.

The only plan I have seen is to obstruct and minimize any possible help. It's amazing to me that they did as well as they did in the mid term Red Ooze.

#55 | Posted by donnerboy at 2022-11-12 11:39 AM | Reply

Our Dem congress had time to pass a bill to address this and chose to prioritize infrastructure spending and other issues.

#56 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2022-11-12 11:40 AM | Reply

I wonder if this applies to Public Service Loan Forgiveness too.

#57 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-11-12 12:15 PM | Reply

I wonder if this applies to Public Service Loan Forgiveness too.

#57 | POSTED BY SNOOFY AT 2022-11-12 12:15 PM | FLAG:

Nope, still good. Covered by the CCRAA and not an emergency pandemic authorization.

"Not everybody realizes that, but the president can only postpone, delay but not forgive student loans. It would take an act of Congress, not an executive order, to cancel student loan debt." -Nancy Pelosi, on using Pandemic powers to cancel student loan debt.

Instead we got the American Rescue Plan, PPP extension, Infrastructure & Jobs Act, two stopgap spending bills, a raising of the national debt limit, Juneteenth as a federal holiday, and the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act.

#58 | Posted by sitzkrieg at 2022-11-12 12:49 PM | Reply

To me, this is no different than if the President announced he was "forgiving" up to $100,000 of all Federally backed mortgages. While I would be delighted to suddenly own my house free and clear, I would still believe it was an overreach for a President to do that, and ethically questionable just prior to an election.

#40 | POSTED BY MIRANDA7

That would be overreach.

Because he's be forcing private entities to forgive their debts.

That's not what's happening with student loan forgiveness.

#59 | Posted by jpw at 2022-11-12 04:16 PM | Reply

"To me, this is no different than if the President announced he was "forgiving" up to $100,000 of all Federally backed mortgages."

I like how $10,000 became $100,000.

There was some kind of mortgage relief during the Great Recession, though.

#60 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-11-12 04:25 PM | Reply

Go read the constitution

Diuhhh ThE ConStItUtIoN!!!

Because only simpleton righties have read it. Lawyers? Nope. Never heard of it.

#61 | Posted by jpw at 2022-11-12 04:59 PM | Reply

To me, this is no different than if the President announced he was "forgiving" up to $100,000 of all Federally backed mortgages.

Is there an existing statute allowing the HUD Secretary to "compromise, waive, or release any claim, however acquired?" Because there is one with regard to the Dept of Ed. If there is no such statute for the HUD Secretary then your analogy is stupid.

#62 | Posted by JOE at 2022-11-12 05:01 PM | Reply

"Just another example of Dems enacting their plans to help Americans and republicans doing everything they can to block and obstruct that help from getting to Americans."

Should judges ignore the law if you think breaking it is "helping" someone?

What if Trump thinks it is helping someone?

#63 | Posted by madbomber at 2022-11-12 06:55 PM | Reply

I'm not understanding what the opposition to this is? This is a tax cut targeted to those with loans. No tax money Is being spent in order to pay off the forgiven balance, the government is foregoing future payments from those with loans. In other words, it's sticking its fingers Less into people's pockets.

The only thing people are angry about, is they don't like the demographic maybe?

"Forget those educated kids! They suck! We love crowing about "less money to the government" unless it's from those damn loud kids with degrees that don't vote the way I do! They need to have MORE of their money taken by the government!

As long as they don't touch MY money. "

Special interest groups are fine, as long as you are with them, is that it?

#64 | Posted by ABH at 2022-11-12 08:11 PM | Reply

#52. GTJR you might want to read what this does. It's not a spending bill. No money is being moved to support it. So it is NOT violation of the constitution as you describe.

#65 | Posted by ABH at 2022-11-12 08:14 PM | Reply

"I'm not understanding what the opposition to this is?"

It's a handout, and handouts are Bad.

#66 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-11-12 08:18 PM | Reply

"It's a handout, and handouts are Bad."

The question is not about whether or not it is a handout...it most definitely is.

The question is whether or not it is a legal handout.

And that's a question only the courts can answer.

#67 | Posted by madbomber at 2022-11-12 08:44 PM | Reply

Of course, those who brought this lawsuit were perfectly happy when millions in PPP loans were forgiven, but then that went mostly to older, white males, so that was good. But a bunch of younger, and often brown or black, recent students getting $10K or $20K taken off their student loans, we can't have that, that smacks of socialism. But giving corporations millions, that's just capitalism at its best.

OCU

#68 | Posted by OCUser at 2022-11-12 10:41 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Another question ... is this a one time thing or the first annual...?
There will be people with outstanding loans next year? What about them?

#69 | Posted by Charliecharles at 2022-11-12 11:09 PM | Reply

From what I've read the Biden admin isn't going to appeal. It was always a vote buying gambit and they got good participation from Gen Z. Misssion accomplished.

#4 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER AT 2022-11-11 08:39 PM | REPLY

The appeal was filed before you even first read about the judgment.

Hack.

#70 | Posted by VictorZiblis at 2022-11-13 01:19 AM | Reply

Seriously. I want one pro tax cut conservative to defend their position that the government should be taking more money from this group of people. Seriously. Fighting tooth and nail for reducing the money flowing from people's pockets to the government coffers should be across the board. Or is it only certain people should have less taken?

I honestly want to know how you go from crying about the government taking too much money from people, to: OMG! Why are you taking less from them!!!

#71 | Posted by ABH at 2022-11-13 06:28 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Of course a Trump appointee,
of course from Texas...

I bet he's objective as Hell!
(rolls eyes)

#72 | Posted by earthmuse at 2022-11-13 10:26 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"#52. GTJR you might want to read what this does. It's not a spending bill. No money is being moved to support it. So it is NOT violation of the constitution as you describe."

By that logic a Republican president can declare a national emergency and instruct the IRS to forgive capital gains taxes for 2 years.

That's not how our constitutional system works.

#73 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-11-13 11:10 AM | Reply

"I honestly want to know how you go from crying about the government taking too much money from people, to: OMG! Why are you taking less from them!!!

#71 | POSTED BY ABH AT 2022-11-13 06:28 AM"

It's not so much that action but how it was achieved. If congress were to pass a bill forgiving student debt in the manner prescribed by POTUS and it was signed into law it would result in griping and criticism but its legitimacy wouldn't be challenged.

Even if we were to accept that Biden has this authority for the sake of argument (he doesn't) he didn't even submit to the public comments period as required. As you might recall it's for that reason SCOTUS shot down Trump's attempt to end DACA. Of course, Obama didn't do the public comments thing when he signed it, but I digress.

#74 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-11-13 11:15 AM | Reply

"If congress were to pass a bill banning abortion and it was signed into law it would result in griping and criticism but its legitimacy wouldn't be challenged."

"If congress were to pass a bill reinstating slavery and it was signed into law it would result in griping and criticism but its legitimacy wouldn't be challenged."

Just wanted to point out what this line of reasoning is okay with.

#75 | Posted by snoofy at 2022-11-13 11:22 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Look at all the effort you thugs put into denying help to Americans.

If only rethugs would put as much effort into helping Americans as they do in obstructing any help from reaching the folks who need it America would be not only be great it would be fracking awesome .

#76 | Posted by donnerboy at 2022-11-13 11:25 AM | Reply

Actually, as has been pointed out, the executive branch, through the department of education, has the authority to modify student loans at will.

This is a huge tax break for a large swath of the American public. Mine have been paid off for years so it doesn't affect me. But I'm not a monster, so I don't begrudge other people getting something I wish I had gotten.

#77 | Posted by ABH at 2022-11-13 11:47 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

Who wouldn't want to increase the national debt by 400,000,000 and enjoy the inflationary boost that would bring if it meant easing the burden of households making 250K a year?

"More than half plan to buy new clothes with the Biden bucks, while a whopping 46% of prospective beneficiaries say they'll use the extra cash to dine out or go on vacation. With surprising candor, 28% even admitted they'll use it to buy drugs or alcohol!

Clearly, these struggling young Americans were sorely and desperately in need of taxpayer-funded relief."

New York Post (That's for Tony Copy Paste)

#78 | Posted by visitor_ at 2022-11-13 07:33 PM | Reply

New York Post! LMAO

#79 | Posted by Alexandrite at 2022-11-13 07:38 PM | Reply

78. And why do you give a crap what they say they are doing to spend their money on? Isn't it better than being taken by the government? Which, if spent in the manner you've described, is then distributed directly into the local economy saving or creating jobs.

Which, I am assuming you don't understand due to the stupidity of your posting on this topic, is a GOOD thing for the economy and the country as a whole ... .. while ALSO being good for the people that had their debt burden erased (it's important to note that it was erased and NOT paid off - there is a difference).

#80 | Posted by ABH at 2022-11-13 07:49 PM | Reply

ABH taking an absolute ---- on Republicans ITT. They won't notice, cause they've been gleefully wallowing in it for six years.

#81 | Posted by JOE at 2022-11-13 08:10 PM | Reply

If posters like Visitor couldn't come onto this blog and express their absolute hatred and disgust for certain fellow taxpaying Americans they'd never be here at all.

#82 | Posted by tonyroma at 2022-11-13 08:53 PM | Reply

The government isn't taking THEIR money, they are returning the money the government gave them as a loan. It's the government's money.

#83 | Posted by visitor_ at 2022-11-13 09:04 PM | Reply

83 stop it. You're embarrassing yourself. The overwhelming majority of those loans have been paid back several times over from the accrued interest. I'm fine with the government breaking even on loans to students and not earning a profit. That's dirt off the point, isn't it?

#84 | Posted by ABH at 2022-11-13 10:07 PM | Reply

Also, this doesn't even take into consideration that the government actually caused these loans to be so high, besides they caused college routine to outpace inflation by 400%.

By federally guaranteeing, and by making the debt not discardable in bankruptcy, the flow of money is 100% risk free. Even a" visitor " can understand that if you have a wide open spigot of money flowing with 0 risk, everyone that asks is getting a loan. Colleges, then see that their supply of money is inexhaustible, so they can charge whatever they like, and it will get paid. The only person in this situation that loses, is the borrower trying to get an education. It is virtually impossible for the college, the government, or any intermediary banks to lose money. For the consumer? You can't be rid of the debt, EVER. Declare bankruptcy 1000 times, and you will STILL have to pay that student loan back.

Government got in bed with colleges and banks and caused these loans to cross over into predatory. Yet, we are going to cry when the government takes the tiniest step to help b appreciate SOMETHING from the borrowers? Please. Let them have their money back. The government got what it wanted a million times over. It's fine.

#85 | Posted by ABH at 2022-11-13 10:20 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#83 | POSTED BY VISITOR_

And how does that make it any different from a PPP loan that was forgiven?

#86 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2022-11-13 10:23 PM | Reply

First I've heard of this: "overwhelming majority of those loans have been paid back several times over from the accrued interest"

I don't suppose you have a link for that do you? That would shed a different light on these loans.

#87 | Posted by visitor_ at 2022-11-13 10:25 PM | Reply

#86 How is it the same? I'm not sure those loans should have been forgiven either, can you make a case for why PPP loans should be forgiven?

#88 | Posted by visitor_ at 2022-11-13 10:27 PM | Reply

I don't suppose you have a link for that do you?

Why didn't you bother to educate yourself before mouthing off to those of us who already know the truth?

For some, student loan debt is doubling, tripling, and even quadrupling

Rick Tallini didn't worry much about the $55,000 in federal student loans he took out for law school in the 1990s. His future seemed bright.

Yet in the decades since he graduated, he's struggled to find employment and pay the bills. His original student loan balance, meanwhile, has soared to well over $300,000.

"They'll tack this thing to my coffin at this point," Tallini, 61, said.

"Loans doubling, tripling, quadrupling, it really does happen all the time," said Persis Yu, director of the Student Loan Borrower Assistance Project at the National Consumer Law Center, a nonprofit advocacy group.

"There are ways these loans are structured that encourage this ballooning," Yu said.

www.cnbc.com

#89 | Posted by tonyroma at 2022-11-13 10:56 PM | Reply

More:

Increasing student loan balances are a very real and very frustrating problem. This issue is so common that nearly half of all student loan borrowers have an increased balance after 5 years. In some cases, missed payments and late fees can explain the larger balances. In many cases, however, the borrower hasn't done anything wrong, yet the balance still increased.

What causes a student loan balance to increase?

Growth During School - Most borrowers don't make payments during school. Yet, interest still grows on the loan during school (the one exception would be a federal subsidized loan). This can mean years of growth and compounding interest. As a result, many borrowers enter repayment with a balance significantly larger than what they actually borrowed.

Income-Driven Payments - This issue is unique to federal loans. Because federal income-driven plans allow borrowers to make payments based upon what they can afford rather than what they owe, the monthly interest on the loan may be higher than the monthly payment. When this happens, the total student loan balance increases with each passing month.

studentloansherpa.com

If you need any more, Google it yourself.

#90 | Posted by tonyroma at 2022-11-13 11:01 PM | Reply

There are always edge cases. But that doesn't mean "overwhelming majority of those loans have been paid back several times over from the accrued interest"

SOME may owe multiples of what they borrowed but that is not the same as actually paying back several times over.

Our unbiased fact check gives this claim infinity Pinocchios.

#91 | Posted by visitor_ at 2022-11-13 11:11 PM | Reply

Our unbiased fact check gives this claim infinity Pinocchios.

You're about as unbiased as a crooked 3 Card Monte game.

In 2021, Investopedia reported that "nearly one-third of all American students now have to go into debt to get through college, and the average student loan debt reached a record high of $40,904 in 2021. Collectively, they owe about $1.75 trillion."

Furthermore, "1 in 5 millennials with debt expect to die without ever paying it off," NBC reported in 2019.

www.dailydot.com

Have anything other than the bovine fecal matter you pull out of your arse to counter the three links above?

#92 | Posted by tonyroma at 2022-11-13 11:21 PM | Reply

that is not the same as actually paying back several times over.

That is what many would have to do in order to zero out their balances.

The creator says he graduated from college in 2013 and has put around $60,000 towards his loans since.

"But, because the interest is so high, even though I've paid over $60,000 toward my debt, I still now owe more than when I started," Bradley continues.

He states that he has one loan for $114,000 with a 7% interest rate, which he pays $900 a month for. "But because the interest is so high and the amount of the loan is so high, every time it comes time to make a payment again, that $900 is essentially back from interest, and it's moving nowhere," he says.

In a later video, he reveals that he had a total of $130,000 in student loan debt from a degree he completed in 2013. He claims that after paying around $60,000 over the past nine years, he currently owes $147,000 total - $17,000 more than the original amount he borrowed.

www.dailydot.com

Our government should never have been in the business of strapping students with debts they can't pay off in a timely manner; can't unburden themselves of in bankruptcy; and resign millions to die still owing said debt after decades of payments.

#93 | Posted by tonyroma at 2022-11-13 11:29 PM | Reply

Does POTUS have ANY constraints on power when a Dem is in office? This has gotten absurd.

#94 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-11-14 12:32 AM | Reply

At best this is the worst possible solution to a problem that was created by individuals making poor decisions and universities and government enabling and encouraging those decisions. It solves nothing but it did effectively buy votes for Democrats.

#95 | Posted by visitor_ at 2022-11-14 07:46 AM | Reply

95. I disagree that this is the worst possible solution. It IS the smallest step in a solution. I don't hold out hope that the government will actually enact the solutions needed.

All loans, even student loans, should be means tested for repayment. I believe the criteria shouldn't be limited to parents income, but the major and the market value of the degree. I can't see why anyone would give an NYU student 200000 of loans to cover a degree in Eastern Serbian n architecture, and then act all shocked when they can't repay it. At the same time. People already with money shouldn't be the ones going to school. So absolutely, the engineers, the chemists, and the like should have priority for funds because they are the most likely to be able to repay them. Other degrees souls rely more on scholarships from donations made by people that care about whatever field they're into.

Secondly, bankruptcy should dissolve student loan debt. All day every day, like anything else.

Both of those things would shut the ever flowing money spigot flowing into colleges down to a trickle. Suddenly colleges would have to compete for those dollars, prices SHOULD come down, many predatory schools would shutter their doors, and the market would normalize.

Assuming of course a new way to screw the poor doesn't pop up.

#96 | Posted by ABH at 2022-11-14 09:32 AM | Reply

Does POTUS have ANY constraints on power when a Dem is in office? This has gotten absurd.
#94 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

When it comes to 20 USCA 1082 and the power to cancel student loan debt, the answer to your question is a resounding "no." Thanks for asking!

#97 | Posted by JOE at 2022-11-14 10:36 AM | Reply

#96 Your economics are backwards. College tuition has been vastly outpacing inflation for decades. Absolving student loans will only exacerbate that.

#98 | Posted by BellRinger at 2022-11-14 11:11 AM | Reply

You have literally no understanding of the problem if you don't link the government interference to WHY Tuition is increasing.

The federally backed, non discardable loans means colleges can charge whatever they want, and students will ask for larger and larger loans to meet that demand ... And since there is legitimately no risk to any lender, they will give them what they ask for.

College tuition started sky rocketing As soon as this started and it does no sign of abating.

Again, you are totally missing what is happening. NO ONE Is paying off these loans for the borrowers. The government is just erasing a portion (or all if it's 20k or less) off their principle. Colleges weren't harmed, and of course banks aren't harmed, God forbid ... . The only one "harmed" in this scenario is the government agreeing to take less money from those with loans.

If you don't understand the topic, leave it to those that do, and just say thank you for fixing it.

#99 | Posted by ABH at 2022-11-14 11:17 AM | Reply

Absolving student loans will only exacerbate that.

#98 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER

As usual you have no proof of your whines.

Republicans have no plan themselves so they whine.

Would you like some cheese with that you poor desperate thing?

#100 | Posted by donnerboy at 2022-11-14 11:19 AM | Reply

But just to rub your nose in it a a little:

lendedu.com

I started college in 1987. Tuition to the state school I attended was 3,000 dollars a year. In 1987 dollars today that's the equivalent of 7800 a year. Well, things changed in 1992 and in 1995. And *gasp* tuition at that same school is now 18,000 per year in state.

It's almost like I'm right about government interference causing the problem ... ..

#101 | Posted by ABH at 2022-11-14 11:36 AM | Reply

It's almost like I'm right about government interference causing the problem ...

It's also almost like you haven't a clue.

It's as though you think rising administration costs, cuts in state and federal funding during the recession and more competition creating more demand (and less supply) had nothing to do with it.

Financing from state and federal governments contributes substantially to public colleges' funding. This funding constitutes more than a thirdof their revenues. But the amount that schools receive has dipped significantly since the Great Recession.

After adjusting for inflation, the total state funding that public two- and four-year colleges received in the 2017-18 school year was more than $6.6 billion below contributions in 2008.

Colleges reacted by raising tuition, and in some cases, cut faculty and certain course offerings. State funding has begun to climb slowly since 2012 but still has not returned to pre-recession levels.

www.affordablecollegesonline.org

#102 | Posted by donnerboy at 2022-11-14 12:29 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Outpacing inflation by over 400%? Please. Look at the endowments of schools. They are massive. They could have taken the dip in state funding in stride without an issue.

www.usnews.com

I'll use a state school: Texas A&M. It has an endowment of 18 billion dollars. they have enough money sitting around in their endowment to send hundreds of thousands of kids in state students to school for free.

So yes, please tell me how hard they were hit by the state funding reduction and how

#103 | Posted by ABH at 2022-11-14 12:41 PM | Reply

... . They needed to hike up tuition.

#104 | Posted by ABH at 2022-11-14 12:42 PM | Reply

"In 2021, Investopedia reported that "nearly one-third of all American students now have to go into debt to get through college, and the average student loan debt reached a record high of $40,904 in 2021. Collectively, they owe about $1.75 trillion."

The fact that 1/3 of students have to borrow doesn't bother me. In fact, I wouldn't have a problem if that % actually increased.

What truly concerns me is that if they do have to borrow, the amount they borrow is pretty high. It's the average loan balance that is what's driving the issue.

#105 | Posted by eberly at 2022-11-14 12:50 PM | Reply

"Look at the endowments of schools. They are massive. They could have taken the dip in state funding in stride without an issue."

That's a slippery slope.

People that give the sums they do to endowment funds might not be as interested in donating if the purpose is to "lower the cost of tuition for everyone". It's not sexy and the donors can just choose one of the other options they have to give away their wealth.

My guess is that every major university with any kind of a sizable endowment fund has looked at the idea of using the endowment to subsidize the cost of NOT raising tuition or even lower it.

And they aren't in favor of doing that.

As Tony's link points out, only 1/3 of kids have loans. Why lower the cost for the other 2/3 when they are fine paying their way now?

And the donor who wants their name attached to new buildings and major renovations aren't interested in making 2/3 of the student's parents any better off with regards to tuition costs.

#106 | Posted by eberly at 2022-11-14 12:55 PM | Reply

That's a factor, it's not the only factor and not even the biggest one since even accounting for decreased state support tuition has risen dramatically. It certainly doesn't explain private colleges that have raised tuition at even higher rates.

#107 | Posted by visitor_ at 2022-11-14 01:24 PM | Reply

If anyone need a tax deduction, Harvard can always used another performing arts center.

#108 | Posted by visitor_ at 2022-11-14 01:25 PM | Reply

If anyone need a tax deduction, Harvard can always used another performing arts center.

POSTED BY VISITOR_ AT 2022-11-14 01:25 PM | REPLY

As if you know anything about Harvard.

#109 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2022-11-14 01:31 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2023 World Readable

Drudge Retort