Skip to content Skip to footer

Officials Raise Concern Over Biden’s Plan to Limit Student Loan Cancellation

Officials say the Education Department doesn’t have the data to implement a debt cancellation plan with an income cap.

Student loan borrowers gather near the White House to tell President Biden to cancel student debt on May 12, 2020, in Washington, D.C.

As the Biden administration crafts a plan to cancel some amount of student debt, administration officials are reportedly raising concerns that adding income caps to the plan could be incredibly logistically complicated, risking the efficacy of the entire plan.

As Politico reports, officials in President Joe Biden’s Education Department are saying in private conversations that it would be extremely difficult for the agency to implement the administration’s tentative plan to limit student loan forgiveness by income. The agency simply doesn’t have income information for the vast majority of student loan borrowers, sources told Politico.

If the Biden administration were to place some form of means testing on the plan, the Education Department would be forced to require borrowers to provide proof of their income in some kind of application process. The added step could make it hard to implement the program before the November midterm elections, if it could be done in that timeline at all.

An Education Department spokesperson said that the agency is assessing options for “broad debt cancellation.” The White House has yet to finalize its plan.

Earlier this month, White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki said that Biden is considering limiting debt cancellation to borrowers making less than $125,000 a year. The cap is meant to preempt arguments from conservatives that only the wealthy would benefit from student loan forgiveness, even though those arguments have already been debunked; earlier this month, a report found that student loan forgiveness would be progressive, meaning that the poorest borrowers would benefit the most.

News of the income cap sparked frustration among progressives and debt advocates, who have been warning about this exact scenario; they say that applying means testing to the debt forgiveness would not only be unpopular among borrowers, but would also place unnecessary hurdles to the program that could limit access for those who need it most. Advocates for debt forgiveness were already frustrated that Biden will likely only cancel a small portion of the roughly $1.9 trillion in student loans owed by borrowers.

“The simplest way to implement student debt cancellation is to make it fully automatic and universal,” Braxton Brewington, Debt Collective spokesperson, said in a statement. “Forcing millions to apply for their rightfully owed cancellation will exclude the exact borrowers a targeted approach claims to help. If Biden needs reminding that burying borrowers and the Education Department in paperwork is wildly ineffective, he can look no further than the 99 percent denial rate of current programs like Public Service Loan Forgiveness,” or the PSLF program.

Indeed, the PSLF program is supposed to allow public service workers like teachers to apply for student loan forgiveness after a decade on the job. But the Government Accountability Office (GAO) found in 2019 that the program is completely burdened by its eligibility requirements, leading it to reject nearly every application it receives. Melissa Emrey-Arras, who led work on the GAO report, called it a “bureaucratic nightmare.”

If broader student loan cancellation were implemented in a similar way, it could backfire on the Democratic Party, which is eager to win over voters before the midterms. The majority of Americans support some form of student loan forgiveness, and polls have found that student loan forgiveness could help drive people who are likely to vote Democrat to the polls in the fall. A means tested program, meanwhile, could make the idea less popular.

“The landmines on this are everywhere,” Bryce McKibben, former policy adviser to Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee member Sen. Patty Murray (D-Washington), told Politico. “Their options are: an income cap and political train wreck — or no income cap and broader, automatic-based relief for everyone. There’s not a lot in between.”

Progressive Representatives Mondaire Jones (D-New York) and Ayanna Pressley (D-Massachusetts) also told the publication that the cancellation should be broad and “reach as many people as possible,” as Pressley said.

Truthout Is Preparing to Meet Trump’s Agenda With Resistance at Every Turn

Dear Truthout Community,

If you feel rage, despondency, confusion and deep fear today, you are not alone. We’re feeling it too. We are heartsick. Facing down Trump’s fascist agenda, we are desperately worried about the most vulnerable people among us, including our loved ones and everyone in the Truthout community, and our minds are racing a million miles a minute to try to map out all that needs to be done.

We must give ourselves space to grieve and feel our fear, feel our rage, and keep in the forefront of our mind the stark truth that millions of real human lives are on the line. And simultaneously, we’ve got to get to work, take stock of our resources, and prepare to throw ourselves full force into the movement.

Journalism is a linchpin of that movement. Even as we are reeling, we’re summoning up all the energy we can to face down what’s coming, because we know that one of the sharpest weapons against fascism is publishing the truth.

There are many terrifying planks to the Trump agenda, and we plan to devote ourselves to reporting thoroughly on each one and, crucially, covering the movements resisting them. We also recognize that Trump is a dire threat to journalism itself, and that we must take this seriously from the outset.

Last week, the four of us sat down to have some hard but necessary conversations about Truthout under a Trump presidency. How would we defend our publication from an avalanche of far right lawsuits that seek to bankrupt us? How would we keep our reporters safe if they need to cover outbreaks of political violence, or if they are targeted by authorities? How will we urgently produce the practical analysis, tools and movement coverage that you need right now — breaking through our normal routines to meet a terrifying moment in ways that best serve you?

It will be a tough, scary four years to produce social justice-driven journalism. We need to deliver news, strategy, liberatory ideas, tools and movement-sparking solutions with a force that we never have had to before. And at the same time, we desperately need to protect our ability to do so.

We know this is such a painful moment and donations may understandably be the last thing on your mind. But we must ask for your support, which is needed in a new and urgent way.

We promise we will kick into an even higher gear to give you truthful news that cuts against the disinformation and vitriol and hate and violence. We promise to publish analyses that will serve the needs of the movements we all rely on to survive the next four years, and even build for the future. We promise to be responsive, to recognize you as members of our community with a vital stake and voice in this work.

Please dig deep if you can, but a donation of any amount will be a truly meaningful and tangible action in this cataclysmic historical moment. We are presently looking for 253 new monthly donors in the next 3 days.

We’re with you. Let’s do all we can to move forward together.

With love, rage, and solidarity,

Maya, Negin, Saima, and Ziggy