Interest rates on student loans could double or more under several scenarios being debated in Congress.

The U.S. House of Representatives on Thursday approved legislation that would tie interest rates to market rates, a move critics say will put a bigger burden on students. But the bill also would block an automatic doubling of interest rates that is set to occur on July 1. While the House bill is unlikely to make it through the Democrat-controlled Senate in its current form, if nothing is done, interest rates will double as scheduled later in the summer.

The bill, HR 1911, known as the Smarter Solutions for Students Act, would tie interest rates to a 10-year Treasury note, capping them at 8.5 percent or 10.5 percent depending on the type of loan. It passed the Republican-controlled House by a vote of 221 to 198, with all but four Democrats – including Rep. Scott Peters of San Diego County – voting no.

Representative Virginia Foxx, R-NC, co-author of the bill, said it provides a long-term, market-based solution to stabilize student loan rates.

“The Smarter Solution for Students Act puts an end to the temporary fixes that have failed to strengthen our nation’s student loan system and offers simplicity, rate caps and an assurance that interest rates are immediately in line with the free market – a need particularly acute in this jobless economy,” Foxx said.

Debt load of California students graduating from public four-year colleges and universities.  (Source: The Project on Student Debt, The Institute for College Access & Success).

Debt load of California students graduating from public four-year colleges and universities. Source: The Project on Student Debt, The Institute for College Access & Success

Advocacy groups say the bill has the right goal of preventing the doubling of rates from 3.4 percent to 6.8, but is the wrong approach. HR 1911 actually leaves student borrowers open to even higher rates, rising to about 7.36 percent by the time this fall’s freshmen graduate, according to The Institute for College Access & Success, or TICAS, and The Education Trust.

“To make matters worse, the rate on every loan will change each year – like on credit cards and risky variable-rate mortgages that caused the financial crisis. This means the monthly payments required under most plans will change each year as well,” they wrote in a joint statement.

The University of California has also weighed in against HR 1911 and in support of efforts by some members of Congress to extend the current rate for another two years to give lawmakers and the White House time to work out a compromise bill.

“UC believes federal student loans are a public good and that there should be some level of federal benefit for low-income undergraduate and graduate students to help assure that students from a broad range of income levels can finance their postsecondary education,” Gary Falle, director of UC’s governmental relations office in Washington, D.C., wrote in a memo.

About 325,000 students who graduated from or left California colleges in 2010 had federal student loans, according to the latest figures from the U.S. Department of Education. Compared to other states, California ranks near the bottom of federal student debt and, for once, that’s a good place to be. The Project on Student Debt at the Institute for College Access and Success said California ranks 46th nationwide in average debt at public and private non-profit four-year colleges and universities, at about $18,879 per student. It’s slightly lower at UC and significantly less at California State University with an average of about $12,411.  Both are well below the national average of $29,059 at public colleges and $23,065 at private non-profit colleges.

President Obama has another proposal that’s similar to the Republican House bill, but offers more stability for student borrowers.  His would also establish interest rates based on the Treasury rate, but that amount would be set for the life of the loan.

One of the biggest concerns for California advocates is the amount of loans being taken out by students attending for-profit colleges, who are more likely to default on their repayments. According to TICAS, the average two-year default rate for students with federal loans who attended for-profit colleges in California is 13.4 percent, more than three times higher than the rate at private non-profit schools, and twice as high as at state colleges and universities.

A report by the Congressional Research Service, prepared for Rep. George Miller, D-Martinez, the ranking minority leader on the Committee on Education and the Workforce, found that a student who borrows the maximum of $27,000 in federal Stafford loans over four years would pay an estimated $7,033 in interest under the current rate, $10,867 if the rate is allowed to double on July 1, and $12,374 under HR 1911.

The additional money would go to help pay down the federal debt. In a letter to House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, and Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, a coalition of student groups wrote that this is the wrong way to go about raising revenue.

“We should not increase student debt to pay down the deficit,” the coalition wrote. “Students are already doing their part for deficit reduction by studying hard so they can earn more, pay more in taxes, and repay their student loans.”

 

To get more reports like this one, click here to sign up for EdSource’s no-cost daily email on latest developments in education.

Share Article

Comments (3)

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked * *

Comments Policy

We welcome your comments. All comments are moderated for civility, relevance and other considerations. Click here for EdSource's Comments Policy.

  1. el 11 years ago11 years ago

    Oh My God. For perspective, when my student loans were issued, the interest rate WAS LESS THAN WAS PAID ON A STANDARD SAVINGS ACCOUNT, at that time, around 5%. Today that rate is close to 0%. Student loan debt cannot be discharged in bankruptcy and so the main credit risk is that the student will die. What kind of unprintable crazytude does it take for a lawmaker to believe that 10% is an appropriate rate for student loans? Fixed … Read More

    Oh My God.

    For perspective, when my student loans were issued, the interest rate WAS LESS THAN WAS PAID ON A STANDARD SAVINGS ACCOUNT, at that time, around 5%.

    Today that rate is close to 0%.

    Student loan debt cannot be discharged in bankruptcy and so the main credit risk is that the student will die.

    What kind of unprintable crazytude does it take for a lawmaker to believe that 10% is an appropriate rate for student loans? Fixed rate mortgages are at around 4%!!! And those, you can default on.

    Student loan debt turns out to be a huge drain on the economy. It makes less than zero sense to tap new graduates – who are struggling mightily in this economy – to try to pay down the deficit by saddling them with predatory loans.

    Replies

    • navigio 11 years ago11 years ago

      Education isnt useful unless someone makes some money off of it..

    • Paul 11 years ago11 years ago

      One of the arguments advanced by advocates of higher interest rates is that student loan repayment terms have become more generous in recent years. The old Income-Contingent Repayment (ICR) Plan has been supplemented with the new, more generous, Income-Based Repayment (IBR) Plan. Working ten full-time years in a school or a non-profit agency, or making 25 years' worth of payments (for borrowers in other occupations), cancels all outstanding Stafford loans. The truth is that economic uncertainty … Read More

      One of the arguments advanced by advocates of higher interest rates is that student loan repayment terms have become more generous in recent years. The old Income-Contingent Repayment (ICR) Plan has been supplemented with the new, more generous, Income-Based Repayment (IBR) Plan. Working ten full-time years in a school or a non-profit agency, or making 25 years’ worth of payments (for borrowers in other occupations), cancels all outstanding Stafford loans.

      The truth is that economic uncertainty makes it very unlikely that a borrower will be able to spend ten full-time years in the same school or with the same non-profit agency. Repayment plans, meanwhile, are generally keyed to 10- or 20-year schedules, so it’s unlikely that a borrower who has not defaulted will have outstanding debt after 25 years. (One would have to receive additional deferments for a long graduate program, and/or have years of zero or low payments under IBR, to make it to T+25.) Moreover, these forgiveness arrangements are not vested. A conservative Congress could cancel them at any time.

      The flow of student loan dollars to private, for-profit institutions should simply be cut off. High default rates among the graduates prove that these schools do not produce economic benefits for students. Default rates for graduates of non-profit diploma mills (including some of the largest issuers of teaching credentials in California) should be scrutinized, to see whether those institutions produce economic benefits for their students.

      Ultimately, as with medical care, Americans will have to decide whether ability to pay will be the overriding criterion for access to higher education. California voters have made themselves very clear on this point: the state’s contribution to the cost of an individual’s public university degree has dropped sharply.