New education loan reforms help students

  • Article by: KARA McGUIRE , Star Tribune
  • Updated: March 27, 2010 - 7:20 PM

When the health care bill becomes law, so will historic changes to student lending. Here's what families need to know.

  • 11
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
bonitaMar. 27, 1010:40 PM

Failed to mention this was a major battle in Congress. Guess which political party opposed this reform? If you knew the answer or guessed GOP give yourself ONE point!

7
6
ORIOLE75Mar. 28, 10 5:24 AM

The Republicans kids WILL get educated. Thier objective is to make sure your kids don't.

8
9
RedGuyInBlueStateMar. 28, 10 7:36 AM

"For the 2007-08 school year, nearly two-thirds of private loan borrowers borrowed less than they could have in federal loans" How dare they borrow less than the full amount they could have? We want them as deep in debt as they can get, especially to the federal government.

7
7
scottyhomerMar. 28, 1010:30 AM

With the students being able to bypass the banks for the same money, the banks are no longer going to be profiting from the kids. That is probably the biggest reason the GOP was against this reform. Now a student gets a loan from the same source, at the same rate, at a lower cost, and with the same terms. And the process is simpler than dealing with a multitude of banks trying to make money from what has always been a government loan.

6
2
OmakakiiMar. 28, 1011:58 AM

Wells Fargo screwed me over with a "student loan". It ended up being at 12.5% interest! Big banks don't care about the little people.

7
1
joeeeeeeMar. 28, 1012:49 PM

people will not have a choice. Isn't America all about choice? $61 billion is a small price to pay for choice isn't it? What about the bankers' kids? Are they now supposed to borrow money from the government because their family cann't afford college due to lack of loan fees? Won't this program result in rationing? Every true American should oppose programs that could generate equal results for all. That is UnAmerican. It may even be socialistic. I know half of Americans will oppose the program just for that reason alone. IT IS A GOVENMENT,SOCIALIST TAKEOVER OF 1/16th OF OUR ECONOMY. You know what that means: TIME FOR TEA!!!

2
5
lamont52Mar. 29, 10 9:28 AM

I am a single woman who works full time and I have a moderate income. I have no additional source of imcome other than my paycheck. I am also in college fulltime. Without a government subsidized student loan, I wouldn't be able to afford to go to school. I make too much to qualify for any grants whatsoever. If I had kids, they would be adults now so I wouldn't even qualify as a single mom. I borrowed what I needed for this year and I will take out additional loans for the remaining 2 years of my education. I will gladly repay these loans with a smile on my face and a sense of proud accomplishment that I got a little help to improve myself when I needed it.

1
1
jlowensMar. 31, 10 2:40 PM

I am really interested in hearing from the people that oppose this reform. Please explain why you think the federal government should loan money (tax money by the way) to the banks (at a discount) so that the banks can then turn around and loan the same money (at a higher interest rate) to students, and reap the profits once the students pay it back. Conservatives are always howling about government waste... well this is a 61 BILLION dollar boondoggle for the banks!

1
0
chfnelsonMar. 31, 10 9:07 PM

jlowens, I'm sorry to tell you but the banks money comes from depositors. They don't borrow if from the Government. What this program means is that the feds will be able to control who gets the loans, and what schools they can attend if they get the loans. Don't be too quick to dismiss this as some conspiracy theory. The feds have already exerted controls on schools that accept federal funds. A lot of what is taught, and how schools operate, is dictated by the Feds based on the schools accepting fed money. Once someone controls the purse strings, all other controls follow.

0
0
ruphinaApr. 1, 10 6:22 PM

$61B savings claimed over 9 years, but some costs have been left out. 25000 lost private sector jobs means $3.25B lost taxes to the Feds. It also means they will pay out at least $13B in wages and benefits to the workers they will have to hire to do the loan processing. I know some of you think those guys will pay taxes too, but the don't, for exactly the same reason Obama gave Government Motors a bunch of tax breaks after he nationalized them- you can't really pay a tax to yourself. Of course, this assumes the Feds can run a loan program as cheaply as the private sector; not exactly a given. Bill G.

0
0

Comment on this story   |  

ADVERTISEMENT

Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT