logo
Major student loan changes just came one step closer to becoming law

Major student loan changes just came one step closer to becoming law

Yahoo9 hours ago

WASHINGTON – Congress is closer than it's been in a long time to massively reforming college financial aid.
On June 10, GOP lawmakers in the U.S. Senate proposed their version of the higher education section of President Trump's tax and spending megabill. The 71-page portion of the so-called "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" would set new caps on student loan borrowing while drastically cutting the number of repayment plans.
Read more: Republicans propose massive overhaul of student loans, Pell Grants
The Senate's version of the legislation is less aggressive than the bill that Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives introduced in late April.
While it will likely be further watered down due to congressional budget rules, the scope of the legislation indicates big changes will be enacted soon to how Americans pay for college.
When President Donald Trump asked Republicans to find billions of dollars in federal spending cuts, GOP lawmakers in the House drew up measures to eliminate or dramatically curb many student loan programs.
In April, they proposed cutting subsidized loans altogether for undergraduates. When students take out a federal direct subsidized loan, the government pays the interest while they're in school (and for a short grace period after the students complete their studies).
That idea didn't survive in the Senate version of the bill, which was expected to be slightly more moderate than the House proposal.
Read more: Could Trump fail on tax bill? Why going 'big' doesn't always work out as planned
Other elements of the House version remain, however. Like the House bill, the Senate measure proposes cutting the number of student loan repayment plans to just two. That change would kill former President Joe Biden's Saving on a Valuable Education, or SAVE, program, which former Education Secretary Miguel Cardona repeatedly called the "most affordable repayment plan ever." SAVE has been stalled in court for months, placing roughly 8 million people in forbearance.
The Senate bill would also dramatically curb lending for graduate students and parents (though at lower caps than House Republicans wanted). Ben Cecil, a senior education policy advisor at Third Way, a center-left think tank, said he was pleased to see the bill appeared to make compromises.
"These loan limits are much more reasonable," he said.
Melanie Storey, president of the National Association of Student Financial Aid Administrators, said she was "relieved" some of the "most harmful" provisions of the House bill had been nixed.
"Still, there are several concerning aspects of this bill that would ultimately make college less affordable for students," she said, including changes that "may drive borrowers to riskier private loans, which are not available to all borrowers."
One of college access groups' biggest criticisms of the initial bill was a significant change to Pell Grants, federal subsidies that help lower-income students pay for college.
House Republicans wanted to increase the number of credits students would need to take each semester to be eligible for Pell Grants. The Center for American Progress, a progressive think tank, estimated that two out of three Pell recipients could've lost their grants or received smaller ones if that requirement were enacted.
The Senate version takes a softer approach, codifying a provision to more fully exclude higher-income students qualify for Pell funds.
At the same time, the bill expands Pell Grants in ways that could waste money, according to critics such as Sameer Gadkaree, president of The Institute for College Access & Success, a college affordability group.
'While the Senate nixed most of the House's proposed cuts to the Pell Grant program and averts a looming funding shortfall, it regrettably threatens the program's long-term stability by extending Pell eligibility to unaccredited programs that are unlikely to pay off for students," Gadkaree said in a statement.
One of the biggest distinctions between the House and Senate versions of the bill is that they lay out two entirely different sets of new accountability rules for colleges.
The House proposal would fine colleges for leaving students on the hook for unpaid student loan debt. The Senate's framework suggests taking federal financial aid away from college programs if they can't prove that students who graduate are earning more than they would have without a degree.
Mike Itzkowitz, who served in the Education Department under President Barack Obama, said that concept has bipartisan support.
"I don't know anyone who would be willing to fork over their time to take on loans to earn less than a high school graduate," he said.
But it's possible that particular provision won't survive special Senate rules. To avoid needing the support of Democrats, Republicans are trying to pass Trump's "Big, Beautiful Bill" using the budget process. That strategy comes with challenges, however, namely that the bill must only make changes that spend money or save money.
Significant reforms to college oversight might go too far, said Jon Fansmith, the senior vice president of government relations at the American Council on Education, the main association for colleges and universities.
"This process isn't designed to do complicated policymaking," he said. "I really do worry about rushing something through without understanding what we're doing."
Zachary Schermele is an education reporter for USA TODAY. You can reach him by email at zschermele@usatoday.com. Follow him on X at @ZachSchermele and Bluesky at @zachschermele.bsky.social.
This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: GOP student loan overhaul is getting closer to becoming law

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Police Officers Protest Pride After Being Barred From Marching With Guns
Police Officers Protest Pride After Being Barred From Marching With Guns

New York Times

time23 minutes ago

  • New York Times

Police Officers Protest Pride After Being Barred From Marching With Guns

Clusters of New York police officers stood sentry along the Pride March route on Fifth Avenue on Sunday, in full uniform and armed, watching the parade go by as they do every year. Nearby, dozens of their colleagues gathered behind metal barricades in protest. Some wore their uniforms; others wore polo shirts and hoisted signs emblazoned with rainbows and slogans like 'Let gay cops back into Pride March' and 'Our uniform is our protest.' Behind them, a truck bore a large digital screen with the message 'We will not be erased.' The demonstration was organized by the Gay Officers Action League, an L.B.G.T.Q. police group that has been barred from marching in New York City Pride since 2021. Starting in 1996, groups of uniformed police and corrections officers in New York marched in the parade every year. But the rise of the Black Lives Matter movement made the involvement of the police in festivities in New York and elsewhere in North America increasingly contentious. In 2021, Heritage of Pride, which organizes Pride events in New York, barred the police from marching as a group, part of wave of similar measures that followed the murder of George Floyd at the hands of Minneapolis police officers in May 2020. Since then, officers in many cities have been allowed back into local Pride marches. But in New York, Heritage of Pride did not take action to lift the ban, which was slated to expire in 2025. Two weeks before the parade, Brian Downey, a detective and the president of the Gay Officers Action League, known as GOAL, said Heritage leaders told him that officers could march again on one condition: that they leave their guns at home. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.

GOP Senator Thom Tillis announces he will not seek re-election
GOP Senator Thom Tillis announces he will not seek re-election

UPI

time24 minutes ago

  • UPI

GOP Senator Thom Tillis announces he will not seek re-election

Sen. Thom Tillis, R-NC, pictured during a Senate Veterans' Affairs Committee hearing in February, announced Sunday that he will not seek re-election in 2026. File photo by Bonnie Cash/UPI | License Photo June 29 (UPI) -- Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C, said Sunday that he would not seek re-election, opening up a seat in a state that was already considered a battleground in the 2026 midterm elections. Tillis made the announcement after voting against a procedural measure Saturday night to clear the way for debate on the Senate version of the Trump administration's budget reconciliation bill. "As many of my colleagues have noticed over the last year, and at times even joked about, I haven't exactly been excited about running for another term." Tillis said in a statement sent to media outlets. "That is true since the choice is between spending another six years in Washington or spending that time with the love of my life Susan, our two children, three beautiful grandchildren, and the rest of our extended family back home. It's not a hard choice and I will not be seeking re-election." President Donald Trump threatened Tillis with a primary challenge in N.C. in the 2026 midterms following the GOP Senator's vote against moving the budget bill to the Senate floor for debate. Trump took to social media to criticize Tillis. "Thom Tillis is making a BIG MISTAKE for America, and the Wonderful People of North Carolina!" Trump wrote on his Truth Social account Saturday night. In a statement following the vote Saturday night, Tillis said he was putting the interests of his constituents above party politics. "I did my homework on behalf of North Carolinians, and I cannot support this bill in its current form," Tillis wrote. "It would result in tens of billions of dollars in funding for North Carolina, including our hospitals and rural communities." Tillis also noted that proposed cuts would impact rural hospitals and fall squarely on Medicaid recipients who rely on the program as their only source of medical insurance.

Trump says he's not planning to extend a pause on global tariffs beyond July 9
Trump says he's not planning to extend a pause on global tariffs beyond July 9

Yahoo

time32 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Trump says he's not planning to extend a pause on global tariffs beyond July 9

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump says he is not planning to extend a 90-day pause on tariffs on most nations beyond July 9, when the negotiating period he set would expire, and his administration will notify countries that the trade penalties will take effect unless there are deals with the United States. Letters will start going out 'pretty soon" before the approaching deadline, he said. 'We'll look at how a country treats us — are they good, are they not so good — some countries we don't care, we'll just send a high number out,' Trump told Fox News Channel's "Sunday Morning Futures" during a wide-ranging interview taped Friday and broadcast Sunday. Those letters, he said, would say, 'Congratulations, we're allowing you to shop in the United States of America, you're going to pay a 25% tariff, or a 35% or a 50% or 10%.' Trump had played down the deadline at a White House news conference Friday by noting how difficult it would be to work out separate deals with each nation. The administration had set a goal of reaching 90 trade deals in 90 days. Negotiations continue, but 'there's 200 countries, you can't talk to all of them,' he said in the interview. Trump also discussed a potential TikTok deal, relations with China, the strikes on Iran and his immigration crackdown. Here are the key takeaways: Few details on possible TikTok deal A group of wealthy investors will make an offer to buy TikTok, Trump said, hinting at a deal that could safeguard the future of the popular social media platform, which is owned by China's ByteDance. 'We have a buyer for TikTok, by the way. I think I'll need, probably, China approval, and I think President Xi (Jinping) will probably do it,' Trump said. Trump did not offer any details about the investors, calling them 'a group of very wealthy people.' 'I'll tell you in about two weeks,' he said when asked for specifics. It's a time frame Trump often cites, most recently about a decision on whether the U.S. military would get directly involved in the war between Israel and Iran. The U.S. struck Iranian nuclear sites just days later. Earlier this month, Trump signed an executive order to keep TikTok running in the U.S. for 90 more days to give his administration more time to broker a deal to bring the social media platform under American ownership. It is the third time Trump extended the deadline. The first one was through an executive order on Jan. 20, his first day in office, after the platform went dark briefly when a national ban — approved by Congress and upheld by the Supreme Court — took effect. Trump insists US 'obliterated' Iran's nuclear facilities U.S. strikes on Iran 'obliterated' its nuclear facilities, Trump insisted, and he said whoever leaked a preliminary intelligence assessment suggesting Tehran's nuclear program had been set back only a few months should be prosecuted. Trump said Iran was 'weeks away' from achieving a nuclear weapon before he ordered the strikes. 'It was obliterated like nobody's ever seen before,' Trump said. 'And that meant the end to their nuclear ambitions, at least for a period of time.' Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said Sunday on X that Trump "exaggerated to cover up and conceal the truth." Iran's ambassador to the United Nations, Amir Saeid Iravani, told CBS' 'Face the Nation' that his country's nuclear program is peaceful and that uranium 'enrichment is our right, and an inalienable right and we want to implement this right' under the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. 'I think that enrichment will not — never stop.' Rafael Grossi, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, said on CBS that 'it is clear that there has been severe damage, but it's not total damage." Grossi also said the U.N. nuclear watchdog has faced pressure to report that Iran had a nuclear weapon or was close to one, but 'we simply didn't because this was not what we were seeing.' Of the leak of the intelligence assessment, Trump said anyone found to be responsible should be prosecuted. Journalists who received it should be asked who their source was, he said: 'You have to do that and I suspect we'll be doing things like that.' His press secretary said Thursday that the administration is investigating the matter. A 'temporary pass' for immigration raids on farms and hotels? As he played up his immigration crackdown, Trump offered a more nuanced view when it comes to farm and hotel workers. 'I'm the strongest immigration guy that there's ever been, but I'm also the strongest farmer guy that there's ever been,' the Republican president said. He noted that he wants to deport criminals, but it's a problem when farmers lose their laborers and it destroys their businesses. Trump said his administration is working on 'some kind of a temporary pass' that could give farmers and hotel owners control over immigration raids at their facilities. Earlier this month, Trump had called for a pause on immigration raids disrupting the farming, hotel and restaurant industries, but a top Homeland Security official followed up with a seemingly contradictory statement. Tricia McLaughlin said there would be 'no safe spaces for industries who harbor violent criminals or purposely try to undermine' immigration enforcement efforts. Status of China trade talks Trump praised a recent trade deal with Beijing over rare earth exports from China and said establishing a fairer relationship will require significant tariffs. 'I think getting along well with China is a very good thing,' Trump said. 'China's going to be paying a lot of tariffs, but we have a big (trade) deficit, they understand that." Trump said he would be open to removing sanctions on Iranian oil shipments to China if Iran can show 'they can be peaceful and if they can show us they're not going to do any more harm.' But the president also indicated the U.S. isn't afraid to retaliate against Beijing. When Fox News Channel host Maria Bartiromo noted that China has tried to hack U.S. systems and steal intellectual property, Trump replied, 'You don't think we do that to them?'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store