H.R.4170 - Student Loan Forgiveness Act of 2012

To increase purchasing power, strengthen economic recovery, and restore fairness in financing higher education in the United States through student loan forgiveness, caps on interest rates on Federal student loans, and refinancing opportunities for private borrowers, and for other purposes. view all titles (2)

All Bill Titles

  • Official: To increase purchasing power, strengthen economic recovery, and restore fairness in financing higher education in the United States through student loan forgiveness, caps on interest rates on Federal student loans, and refinancing opportunities for private borrowers, and for other purposes. as introduced.
  • Short: Student Loan Forgiveness Act of 2012 as introduced.

This Bill currently has no wiki content. If you would like to create a wiki entry for this bill, please Login, and then select the wiki tab to create it.

Comments Feed

Displaying 31-60 of 63 total comments.

azsungal77 04/18/2012 2:20pm
in reply to BacktoBasics Mar 23, 2012 12:35pm

Hmm, they spend money just like the government. All it has done is make the people more dependent on government from a financial crisis they created.

easterly 04/17/2012 8:50am
in reply to AndyFiorello Mar 13, 2012 8:58pm

As a student with less than $2000 in student loan debt. I oppose this bill. Everyone makes their own personal decisions to accept a loan. You should fulfill your promise. It is not the job of the people to bail you out because you chose the wrong path.

Duped? No you didn’t make the correct choices and now you want everyone else to pay for it.

Cathy855 03/31/2012 6:53pm
in reply to chask70 Mar 20, 2012 4:26pm

Agree, at least this bill has people paying on the loans based on a percentage of their income for 10 years and at least still be able to have a family and a life and to contribute to the economy. Is it the fault of these students that the government went into a recession and no jobs are out there that allow you to pay back the loans and also food, rent, GAS for your car? Those that “paid back your loans” GREAT FOR YOU! I bet your college cost were not as high and you obviously were able to get a job in order to do so!

AndyFiorello 03/31/2012 11:30am
in reply to BacktoBasics Mar 23, 2012 12:35pm

I agree with you, BacktoBasics, the increase in tuition is quite a problem and the government should step in to better regulate the schools. Another problem I see though, is also the rise of many schools encouraging students to go with private lenders like Sallie Mae. I currently have most of my loans through them because they were supported by DeVry. I was told I could consolidate my loans after I graduate, and there would be a number of repayment options so that I wouldn’t need to worry. However, those options went away not long before my graduation date.

Sallie Mae no longer offers consolidation, and they don’t have many refinancing options either. Since they aren’t backed by the government, they don’t have to offer IBR repayment or forgiveness. However they will give me a forbearance, with a $150 fee, so that the interest can capitalize and increase my balance. Also they have the same protections from bankruptcy that the fed loans have, so I’m stuck with them.

kelmn07 03/30/2012 1:45pm
in reply to franhinkle Mar 21, 2012 4:55pm

bq I was fortunate enough to take advantage of a consolidation program a few years back.

Which explains why you had no problem paying back your loans. I’d also be curious to know what your starting salary was compared to your loan amount then, as opposed to graduates are at now. In my first two years at a ‘real job’ after graduation I made the same as I did waitressing.

kelmn07 03/30/2012 1:41pm
in reply to kelmn07 Mar 30, 2012 1:41pm

*When privatization didn’t exist.

kelmn07 03/30/2012 1:41pm
in reply to Flash Mar 21, 2012 9:43am

Right because private institutions and lack of reforms really seam to be working for the better, airline industry – boom. Housing market – boom. Student loans – boom. Amazing how it didn’t happen when privatization existed.

kelmn07 03/30/2012 1:37pm
in reply to trm63 Mar 14, 2012 11:13am

This just spews of ignorance. Fed loans are low NOW. Not then. Not when the people that are suffering now took them out. 6.8% fixed for a federal loan-not refinance-able. Get it? Private would have been higher. What other choice was there?

I’m sick of reading these stupid, uninformed responses of people spending financial aid on trips, or wasting money on women’s studies, or psychology and such-these are moronic, false statements. I know I never took trips or even had direct access to any of my loans, they were paid directly to the school. Stop spreading stupidity.

ColtonProvias 03/27/2012 6:43pm

Upon reading this bill, it seems more of a bill that will get Democrats praising it while aiming to anger Republicans, especially with the Overseas Contingency Operations line at the very end. It seems doomed to not pass and if it ever makes it to vote will become quite the hot topic in the media.

In my opinion, the best method may be to cap tuition along with all of the semester expenses (room, meal plan, activity fee, etc.) for public universities.

AndyFiorello 03/27/2012 1:29am
in reply to Flash Mar 21, 2012 9:38am

It was society that duped me, though I see it was not with malicious intent. In better economic times, I doubt a bill like this would be needed. If the housing bubble had not burst and put us into the current recession we are in, I know I myself would not have been competing with experienced programmers for the same low paying entry level jobs that I was qualified for.

I don’t feel sorry for myself, I know what I did was the right thing, it was just not the right thing for the current times. Hindsight is 20-20, and if I knew then what I do now, I would have not gone to college, I’d have gotten a job and saved my money, possibly to pursue the career I wanted after things picked back up. I support this bill because I don’t think I, or anyone else seeking to better themselves, should be punished as we are for doing so.

tphill 03/26/2012 12:45am
in reply to AndyFiorello Mar 17, 2012 4:14pm

The problem with this bill is the premise that anyone deserves to have their debt forgiven. As trm63 said, the nature of a loan implies that it will have to be paid back. If you take out a loan, you are signing a contract that says you will give the holder of that loan a certain amount of money over a certain period of time. Regardless of whether or not you consider the terms fair, you signed it. It doesn’t matter if you won’t ever be able to pay it back, that’s your problem, not the government’s or the people’s. I realize that it’s not always your fault that you won’t be able to pay off debt you thought you could, things happen that no one could’ve planned for, but that’s part of life, it’s not the government’s responsibility to bail you out when that happens.

So I won’t support any bill that helps someone “get out of this debt.” You signed it, the only way to get out is to pay it off as per the terms of your contract.

Websurfer 03/24/2012 6:15pm
in reply to ressy Mar 15, 2012 12:05am

That is where the funds are coming from.

Websurfer 03/24/2012 6:12pm
in reply to BacktoBasics Mar 23, 2012 12:43pm

Because private loan vendors don’t care if you have financial hardship, lose your job, get disabled (sometimes they can get discharged for disability in bankruptcy). Plus, private loans are usually repaid in 25 year terms. They love deferments and forbearance because they interest accrues and you have to pay it back.

Websurfer 03/24/2012 6:05pm
in reply to trm63 Mar 14, 2012 11:13am

And homeowners should get a bailout because they bought too big of a house and used their home as a retirement vehicle?

Websurfer 03/24/2012 6:03pm
in reply to BacktoBasics Mar 23, 2012 12:35pm

Did you even read the bill? It only forgives $45,520 for NEW borrowers. Schools shouldn’t see this as a chance to exploit their tuition upon students, since the student loan debt bomb is about to go off.

In 10 years (say $350 a month for 10 years) you basically paid $42,000 debt repayments. So in essence it’s more so a “breathing room bill”, for those of us who took out loans, to invest in our retirements, start a family, buy a home, etc…things that boost the economy.

Sallie Mae and other private loan lenders will be happy because they’ll receive their money from the gov’t during consolidation. So the Republicans should be happy with this.

darkshark67 03/24/2012 7:51am
in reply to AndyFiorello Mar 13, 2012 8:58pm

AMEN!

BacktoBasics 03/23/2012 12:43pm
in reply to chask70 Mar 20, 2012 4:26pm

Debt forgiveness is very different from refinancing.

And why does someone who, for 12 years has made all their payments on time need forgiveness?

BacktoBasics 03/23/2012 12:39pm
in reply to trm63 Mar 14, 2012 11:13am

You bring up a good point about some students. Some students are serious about education and preparing for the future…while some use University to party and live life to the fullest before taking full responsibility for themselves. University is suppose to be finished in 4 years, yet more and more are taking 5-6 years to complete a Bachelor’s degree.

As I mentioned above, I do not think this bill addresses the real problem, which is skyrocketing tuition which leads to large debt…solve the tuition problem and they effect will go away.

BacktoBasics 03/23/2012 12:35pm
in reply to StrawberryFields Mar 21, 2012 10:48pm

One thing that really concerns me about this bill is that it seems as though Universities are being mismanaged – why else is tuition spiraling out of control? Tuition is increasing much faster than wages…but why? These are the questions that need to be answered.

By coming up with a bill to forgive student debt it seems as though we are giving Universities a green light to overprice education without consequences. These institutions already seem to be spending black holes. What will happen once they know they can increase tuition as much as they want without scaring off potential students because students no longer need to worry about the cost because in the end they can stick it to the government.

In the end, the problem that needs to be addressed is tuition cost and ironically, since our Universities are not government run, this needs to be pushed by alumni, current students, parents and future students – ie. the people and not the government.

JoshRRogers 03/23/2012 6:18am
in reply to AndyFiorello Mar 17, 2012 4:14pm

Unless you’re talking about all of those “non-recourse loans” the federal government gave to wealthy individuals to spur investment. Billions in oil and farm subsidies, trillions in bank bailouts, billions spent killing terrorists, but we don’t have enough money to help out the actual people of this country.

StrawberryFields 03/21/2012 10:48pm
in reply to Flash Mar 21, 2012 9:38am

It depends on what year and how much financial support you had going to school. Tuition has quadrupled. I didn’t get a degree in underwater basket weaving, I got a degree in Nursing, a degree that I thought would be easy to pay back, and no my parents didn’t pay my rent, food, or my school tuition. I am told due to budget cuts and experienced nurses coming out of retirement, no one wants new grads, it could cost up to 30k to train a new nurse. I only borrowed 50k and due to interest it has ballooned to 75k… something HAS to be done.

Before you jump the gun and say that you do not support this bill.. check the average tuition for 2009-2012 bet it wasn’t what you had to pay in the past. And how is this bill going after you? … Nothing will effect you if it passes.

You are right about one thing though, the future is ours, and it has to change or else student loans will be the next debt bomb.

SDietz 03/21/2012 9:28pm
in reply to Keirnal1 Mar 14, 2012 12:10pm

Where do you think the Federal Government got the money to give out the loan in the first place?

franhinkle 03/21/2012 4:55pm

As a democratic woman who works in the programming field and having wracked up approx. $47k in student loan debt, I have to say that I do not fully support this bill.

Sure, it would be wonderful for my loan debt to be dismissed or “forgiven” as it’s worded in this bill. But I knew full well what I was getting into when I signed those loan forms. There was a part of me that felt as though I had little choice given that scholarships only pay for so much, but I wanted an education and I was willing to accept the responsibility to pay for it (mostly private loans).

I do, however, support the concept of capping interest rates and more refinancing options for federal student loans — rates got pretty crazy there for awhile and have risen again in recent times. I was fortunate enough to take advantage of a consolidation program a few years back. It locked the interest rate of my federal loans and helped substantially with our monthly payments. For that, I am grateful.

Flash 03/21/2012 9:43am

Apparently, many of the folks supporting this bill did not understand the “nuances” of an Education Loan either.

In my opinion, this is the reason the government should stay out of it. If the government had not stepped in to make all these loans so easy to get, perhaps not so many people would have been “duped” or straddled with such debt.

Flash 03/21/2012 9:38am
Link Reply
+ 10
in reply to AndyFiorello Mar 13, 2012 8:58pm

If you have a problem with being “duped”, go after the folks who duped you. I didnt dupe you.

I paid my student loans back, and it was not easy.

Your future is yours, stop feeling sorry for yourself and make it happen instead of looking for a handout and someone else to bail you out.

What has happened to this country? It is truely sad to see.

chask70 03/20/2012 4:26pm

This Bill isn’t about ‘writing off the entire amount owed’ it’s about giving borrowers options. I am sure if you had been told you couldn’t refinance your home, your vehicle, medical debt, or credit debt to take advantage of more favorable interest rates you would be up in arms. Many of these people have been in repayment 12 years or more, and have been on time, and are current with payments. There are nuances to an Education Loan that most in opposition don’t understand or grasp. It isn’t socialist ‘dreck’, it isn’t people avoiding responsibility, it’s about people repaying, so that the worst, NO ONE PAYING, or writing off the entire loan through bankruptcy doesn’t occur. Or would it be cheaper for all of you to pay for that, or for an overstressed welfare system when these people who have no retirement saved because they are paying upwards of 1800.00 on a loan, then be my guest. I see real validity in this, and the benefits FAR outweigh the risks.

AndyFiorello 03/17/2012 4:14pm
Link Reply
+ 11
in reply to trm63 Mar 14, 2012 11:13am

This is no different than someone getting their loans forgiven under the Income Based Repayment plan, they are just shortening it from 25 years to 10.

As well, federal loans are one thing, but many students don’t qualify for those loans at those low interest rates, I know I didn’t. The majority of my debt is private, I did not ask the government for money to go to school, I went to Sallie Mae, a publicly traded corporation. However because of the changes to bankruptcy law in 2005, my private student loans can’t be forgiven under Chapter 11, but because they aren’t issued by the government, Sallie Mae doesn’t have to cut me any breaks like income based repayment or forgiveness. This bill is currently my only hope to get out of this debt.

ressy 03/15/2012 12:05am
in reply to libbypw Mar 11, 2012 3:50am

Why in the world would the Overseas Contingency Operations be responsible for students loans?

This confused me too. Aside from everyone’s various opinions on either student loans or the war on terror, why would the bill be written this way? It seems very odd to me.

ressy 03/14/2012 11:46pm
in reply to libbypw Mar 11, 2012 3:50am

What a load of socialist dreck and legal double talk intended to obfuscate readers. Why in the world would the Overseas Contingency Operations be responsible for students loans?

I’m not sure yet what I think about most of this bill, and I’d say I’m usually pretty cynical about the entire GWOT/OCO concept… but, section 7 makes no sense to me either, just the same. Kudos for focusing on the actual content and pointing that out. What’s up with that?

And for anyone also thrown off by the shifting terminology:

‘Global War On Terror’ Is Given New Name

Keirnal1 03/14/2012 12:10pm

If the tax payer isn’t involved in your decision of which school you attend and what major you study, the loan you take and the interest rate you take the loan at, then the tax payer shouldn’t be involved in the repayment of your loan. Period. The tax payer should have no presence in any of these places.


Vote on This Bill

84% Users Support Bill

593 in favor / 109 opposed
 

Send Your Rep a Letter

about this bill Support Oppose Tracking
Track with MyOC

Top-Rated Comments