HomeSchool Reform NewsThe Federal Student Loan Program Was Supposed To Pay for Itself. Now,...

The Federal Student Loan Program Was Supposed To Pay for Itself. Now, It’ll Cost Taxpayers $197 Billion (Commentary)

A new report from the Government Accountability Office found that the Federal Student Loan Program will cost over $300 billion more than originally predicted.

The Federal Student Loan Program is often criticized as a source of revenue for the federal government. But a new report from the Government Accountability Office (GAO) shows that the present situation can’t be further from the truth.

When the Federal Direct Student Loan Program began in 1994, the Department of Education estimated that it would generate $114 billion in revenue for the federal government. Almost 30 years later, the program is estimated to cost the government $197 billion, a staggering difference of over $300 billion. The Federal Student Loan Program has failed, and the cost of its failures will be shouldered by the American public.

The largest contributor to the increased cost of the Direct Loan Program is the ongoing pause on student loan payments initiated during the COVID-19 pandemic. According to GAO, previous forms of government spending only increased the cost of the program by around $14 billion. COVID-19 relief, on the other hand, cost the government almost $108 billion in revenue. Even more concerning, the cost of the COVID-19 student loan pause is likely even higher, as the GAO did not include 2022 data in its estimates.

The other sources of the massive cost of the program are more complicated. The GAO notes that the Direct Loan Program has undergone a series of programmatic changes over the years, most notably the creation of the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program and the Income-Based Repayment Plan. While these programs added billions to the cost of the Direct Loan program, 61 percent of the program’s increased estimated cost has come from complicated changes in the economy and the behavior of borrowers.

Income-Driven Repayment plans, such as the 2007 Income-Based Repayment Plan and the 2015 Pay As You Earn Plan, were created to allow students with low-paying jobs to get an indefinite reduction on their student loans. These programs limit the monthly loan payment to an “affordable amount,” which is 10 percent or 15 percent of the borrower’s discretionary income, depending on the program enrollment date.

47 percent of all borrowers are enrolled in an Income-Driven Repayment plan, a percentage that has grown steadily over time. These borrowers tend to earn less and borrow more than other students, highlighting a fundamental failing of the Direct Loan Program: If student borrowers were receiving a valuable return on their investment when they took out student loans, so many of them would not be making so little money that they can only afford to pay small amounts each month.

This particular failing highlights how miserably the Direct Loan Program has failed to achieve its promise of accessible college education and the middle-class quality of life which comes with it. Instead of helping more students access a college education, the Direct Loan Program has incentivized schools to dramatically increase tuition prices, bringing the prospect of affordable education even further out of reach for American students.

Rather than providing students with the skills to obtain high-paying jobs—jobs that make it fairly painless to repay a modest student loan balance—students are increasingly borrowing staggering sums to obtain degrees that barely help them achieve gainful employment. The staggering cost of the Direct Loan Program is yet another reason to retire it. While the program’s contribution to the dramatic increase in college tuition prices should be enough to raise concerns, the fact that the program is running hundreds of billions of dollars over budget is even more cause for alarm.

Originally published by Reason Foundation. Republished with permission.

More great content from School Reform News

Emma Camp
Emma Camp
Emma Camp is an Assistant Editor at Reason. Her work has previously appeared in The New York Times, RealClear Policy, and Persuasion. Following her viral New York Times op-ed, "I Came to College Eager to Debate. I Found Self-Censorship Instead." Emma was awarded the Exceptional Student Award at the Heterodox Academy Open Inquiry Awards. Heterodox Academy wrote that, "As a student suddenly thrust into the spotlight, Emma has remained as principled and constructive as ever. In the face of derogation and unconstructive pushback, she has demonstrated exceptional bravery in championing the principles of open inquiry, viewpoint diversity, and constructive disagreement." Emma has appeared on several podcasts, including CSPAN's Booknotes+, Bad Faith with Briahna Joy Gray, and The Popular Show. She has also been a guest on Rising on Hill TV. She graduated from the University of Virginia in 2022 with degrees in Philosophy and English Literature.



Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

- Advertisment -spot_img

Most Popular

Recent Comments