ILNews

Federal loan repayment program set for expansion

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Obama administration’s move to expand its student loan repayment assistance program – an initiative which may help some lawyers struggling with debt – has put another spotlight on the debate over the rising cost of law school tuition.

President Barack Obama signed an executive order June 9 that would expand the Pay As You Earn program to 5 million more borrowers. This program caps federal student loan payments at 10 percent of the borrower’s income and forgives any amount left unpaid after 20 years.

Currently, PAYE is available only to those who graduated in 2010 and later. The president is proposing the initiative be offered to those who borrowed before October 2007 or ceased borrowing by October 2011.

However, as some point out, the executive order does little to address the problem of ballooning college costs.

While Christopher Chapman, executive director of Access Group Inc., praised the expansion of PAYE, he said many factors contribute to the problem of student loan debt. Part of the solution will have to come from schools making changes to their cost structure.

“No business can consistently increase the price of a product beyond the income of the customer without a negative impact,” Chapman said, adding schools have been taking “simple steps” to curb costs and provide more value to students.

Access Group Inc., a nonprofit comprised of 192 American Bar Association-approved law schools, educates and advises student borrowers who are seeking a professional degree.

Austen Parrish, dean of the Indiana University Maurer School of Law, noted tuition is a complicated issue. Often, he said, the sticker price is not the true cost law students pay because many receive financial assistance from the school.

He estimated that at IU Maurer, more than 90 percent of the students have been awarded reduced tuition rates with the average amount of reduction being between $22,000 and $25,000 annually.

In addition, providing a “rich intellectual environment” is not a cheap endeavor, Parrish continued. To be among the top ranked, law schools must offer students practical experience through clinics and externships with quality faculty and practitioners.

“It’s unclear that you can provide a high-quality law school education at a bargain basement price,” Parrish said. “I think the brightest students want to go to a place that provides a full range” of experiences.

The PAYE expansion will not happen immediately. The president has charged the Department of Education with developing the regulations and having the program available to more borrowers by the end of 2015.

Marvin Smith, director of student financial services at Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis, said questions surrounding how the expansion will be implemented make it difficult to determine how beneficial the program will be to students on the IUPUI campus, including those enrolled at the Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law.

One very worrisome issue for law school graduates is the president’s apparent contradictory moves. On the one hand, he wants to increase PAYE while, on the other hand, his FY 2015 budget request would lower loan forgiveness amounts of borrowers who are in professional and graduate schools.

The White House is proposing to lower the amount of a graduate student’s debt that can be wiped away under the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program, according to an article written by José Espada, director of medical student financial aid at the IU School of Medicine. Under Obama’s budget, loan forgiveness would be capped at $57,500.

Chapman sees the expansion of PAYE as a positive move since it will make more student borrowers eligible for repayment assistance. PAYE and other similar loan repayment programs are good tools for law students and others with high debt and low salaries, he said.

However, Smith and Chapman said borrowers could actually end up owing more if they participate in the PAYE program. While the monthly payment will be lowered, the interest rate will not decrease so the balance on the loan could grow. Chapman also noted that the amount erased is counted as taxable income in the year it is forgiven, requiring borrowers to declare more in income for that year.•
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. No second amendment, pro life, pro traditional marriage, reagan or trump tshirts will be sold either. And you cannot draw Mohammed even in your own notebook. And you must wear a helmet at all times while at the fair. And no lawyer jokes can be told except in the designated protest area. And next year no crucifixes, since they are uber offensive to all but Catholics. Have a nice bland day here in the Lego movie. Remember ... Everything is awesome comrades.

  2. Thank you for this post . I just bought a LG External DVD It came with Cyber pwr 2 go . It would not play on Lenovo Idea pad w/8.1 . Your recommended free VLC worked great .

  3. All these sites putting up all the crap they do making Brent Look like A Monster like he's not a good person . First off th fight actually started not because of Brent but because of one of his friends then when the fight popped off his friend ran like a coward which left Brent to fend for himself .It IS NOT a crime to defend yourself 3 of them and 1 of him . just so happened he was a better fighter. I'm Brent s wife so I know him personally and up close . He's a very caring kind loving man . He's not abusive in any way . He is a loving father and really shouldn't be where he is not for self defense . Now because of one of his stupid friends trying to show off and turning out to be nothing but a coward and leaving Brent to be jumped by 3 men not only is Brent suffering but Me his wife , his kids abd step kidshis mom and brother his family is left to live without him abd suffering in more ways then one . that man was and still is my smile ....he's the one real thing I've ever had in my life .....f@#@ You Lafayette court system . Learn to do your jobs right he maybe should have gotten that year for misdemeanor battery but that s it . not one person can stand to me and tell me if u we're in a fight facing 3 men and u just by yourself u wouldn't fight back that you wouldn't do everything u could to walk away to ur family ur kids That's what Brent is guilty of trying to defend himself against 3 men he wanted to go home tohisfamily worse then they did he just happened to be a better fighter and he got the best of th others . what would you do ? Stand there lay there and be stomped and beaten or would u give it everything u got and fight back ? I'd of done the same only I'm so smallid of probably shot or stabbed or picked up something to use as a weapon . if it was me or them I'd do everything I could to make sure I was going to live that I would make it hone to see my kids and husband . I Love You Brent Anthony Forever & Always .....Soul 1 baby

  4. Good points, although this man did have a dog in the legal fight as that it was his mother on trial ... and he a dependent. As for parking spaces, handicap spots for pregnant women sure makes sense to me ... er, I mean pregnant men or women. (Please, I meant to include pregnant men the first time, not Room 101 again, please not Room 101 again. I love BB)

  5. I have no doubt that the ADA and related laws provide that many disabilities must be addressed. The question, however, is "by whom?" Many people get dealt bad cards by life. Some are deaf. Some are blind. Some are crippled. Why is it the business of the state to "collectivize" these problems and to force those who are NOT so afflicted to pay for those who are? The fact that this litigant was a mere spectator and not a party is chilling. What happens when somebody who speaks only East Bazurkistanish wants a translator so that he can "understand" the proceedings in a case in which he has NO interest? Do I and all other taxpayers have to cough up? It would seem so. ADA should be amended to provide a simple rule: "Your handicap, YOUR problem". This would apply particularly to handicapped parking spaces, where it seems that if the "handicap" is an ingrown toenail, the government comes rushing in to assist the poor downtrodden victim. I would grant wounded vets (IED victims come to mind in particular) a pass on this.. but others? Nope.

ADVERTISEMENT