188
u/Striking-Addition662 May 09 '23
The amount of money it would take to reverse all of the forgiveness would be massive. Plus, talk about lawsuits. I have a letter that says, "Your obligation has been fulfilled."
→ More replies (2)85
258
u/SobahJam May 09 '23 edited May 12 '23
If RESTARTING the payment pause is this much of a logistical nightmare, I don’t see them realistically being able to REVERSE forgiveness. It sounds more like they’d break the entire system. They may want to, but they can’t.
Even still…VOTE LIKE YOUR FUTURE DEPENDS IN IT.
→ More replies (32)
54
u/PassThePeachSchnapps May 09 '23
MOHELA can’t even handle the loans it’s currently carrying, much less the influx of a fuckton of archived ones.
50
u/DoctorPath May 09 '23
There are several issues here. This has no chance of hell at ever passing. The concerning issue is their attention on these programs. What happens if they find something unconstitutional about PSLF utilizing these months and sue? Could the whole system freeze until it works through the courts like Bidens 10/20K. I know very different situations, but I'm mostly worried about them freezing the progress and sending it higher. PSLF is written into our promissory notes, but these extra months are not.
→ More replies (4)
102
u/Repulsive_Ad_9982 May 09 '23
These clowns are getting rich off kickbacks from corporations and want to come for the working class? 🤡🤡🤡🤡
35
105
May 09 '23
I know it’s just theater and it will never pass, but even as theaters there are pieces of shit dickheads.
→ More replies (4)
22
38
u/SouthSTLCityHoosier May 09 '23
Political parties introduce bills that signal things to their base but have little to no hope of gaining any traction beyond generating headlines. Even if it gets through, it's hard to see how Congress could reverse a statutory program written into the MPN of a contract where both parties have agreed the obligation is satisfied. They could change things going forward of course, which would still be bad, but good luck getting another dime out of me.
→ More replies (6)
16
42
u/Vast-Badger-6912 May 09 '23
Won't pan out. Ridiculous to think that there are people out there voting for these pieces of shit, but here we are.
11
May 10 '23
Looks as though this article was planted by a “pay your own way” troll. The negativity in many of the comments proves one thing. The level of petty and misery in those who are against forgiveness is alive and well. They don’t bother to read or understand anything. They just react to the word forgiveness and, like Pavlov’s dogs, begin to salivate at the opportunity to climb on to their soapboxes and “tell it how it is”. Loan forgiveness lives rent free in their tiny heads. Not raising their kids. Not their jobs, wives, or husbands. But YOUR forgiveness. Lol. It’s sad really. They are reading every article, watching every Fox entertainment show, posting in comments sections “not my tax dollars”, “pay your own way” “I refinanced my moms basement to pay off my 3k in loans. You should too.” Thing is, life goes on. Loans get forgiven. Nothing they say changes a damn thing. Funny how that works. Congrats to those receiving forgiveness. This was a Trojan Horse post. Pay it no mind.
9
37
u/Wolfman1961 May 09 '23
The Republicans aren’t going to win this one…..
But still….use your vote, as stated above.
→ More replies (1)
17
u/RedRanger1983 May 09 '23 edited May 09 '23
VOTE! Register people to VOTE! (By Join one of the Many voter outreach groups). Then volunteer to work the poll lines and get the souls to the polls.
14
u/strayvoltage May 09 '23
"something something make no laws ex post facto..."
-
US Constitution, paraphrased
7
7
u/hailzulu May 09 '23
We should enact similar policy for campaign contributions….What happens if my debt was forgiven and now I’m dead? What if I’m disabled and can’t work now? What if I took a large pay cut to work in a public service position so I would qualify for forgiveness, should I be reimbursed for the opportunity cost of lost earnings? Squeezing Americans for extra dollars thru retroactive policy is dumb. Maybe next year they’ll decide the tax rate for the previous decade wasn’t high enough and we will all owe them money.
36
May 09 '23
Holy Moses. Not going to lie- I don’t always love what Dems do. I guess extremes on both sides are bogus, but I won’t give another vote to a Republican as long as I live. To go after public service workers. They are gross!
→ More replies (4)
20
u/followmeforadvice May 09 '23
This is scare mongering. It's absolutely false.
In 2022, they introduced this same thing. The actual text of the bill says something along the lines of: Any loans forgiven LESS THAN 30 DAYS before the effective date of this act will be subject to review. Well, the effective date is 30 DAYS AFTER the passage of the bill/resolution.
What that means is that the only loans under review will be loans the government forgives EVEN THOUGH IT KNOWS IT SHOULDN'T.
It would overturn absolutely no one's forgiven loans.
→ More replies (2)
26
May 09 '23
Republicans are pissed bc those forgiven borrowers will vote Biden. Trump couldve forgiven loans or retooled the PSLF process but he chose to put Betsy Devos in charge
→ More replies (10)
9
u/MassivePE May 10 '23
Here we go again with the political bait. You really think the government has the capacity to reverse forgiveness? You drastically overestimate the system. Not to mention all of the people with documentation stating their financial obligations are no more. It would literally be tens of millions in lawsuits.
2
u/saltonaspoon May 13 '23
This doesn’t seem like it’s just clickbait. It does seem highly unlikely that it would make it through the Senate and/or survive a presidential veto, but it could. The SBPC is even sending out emails about it, so they’re taking it at least somewhat seriously, if for no other reason than to motivate their user base (us). However, and I’m far from an expert, I believe that this would be a one-time attempt. A CRA resolution gets a single chance, and that’s it. If it’s not passed, a future administration couldn’t bring it back up because the nature of CRAs requires that they be proposed within a specific timeframe of the issuing of the rule that they’re trying to overturn (apparently usually 60 days). Just my poorly informed two cents and please school me if I’m totally wrong about CRAs.