Student loan rate hike: Is it really that big of a deal?

istockphoto

(MoneyWatch) COMMENTARY Time is running out for Congress to stop the impending doubling of a federal student loan rate in July.

This is one of those rare instances when President Obama and Mitt Romney, his political opponent in November, agree on something. Both men want to see the rate (3.4 percent) stay right where it is. And Congress says it wants to find a way to make this happen, but the political parties continue to argue about where the money would come from to preserve the interest rate.

If Congress can't come up with a plan by July 1, the interest rate on new subsidized Stafford Loans will jump to 6.8 percent.

My take on this student-loan showdown is different from most media accounts. I'd argue that the current political and media focus on raising the interest rate is overblown and detracting attention from financial aid issues that are more important.

While the media routinely states that the interest rate on federal student loans would double in July when the new financial aid year begins, that's not exactly accurate.

Only the interest rate on the subsidized Stafford Loan will be doubling from 3.4 percent to 6.8 percent. Seventy percent of subsidized Stafford Loans are issued to families that earn less than $70,000 a year. College students, regardless of their income, are eligible for the unsubsidized Stafford Loan, which has an interest rate of 6.8 percent.

An overblown student loan issue
While Americans have roughly $1 trillion in outstanding student debt, only about 3 percent of student debt will be impacted if the Stafford rate doubles.

If the rate does jump, the increase won't amount to much. Over a 10-year repayment period, Mark Kantrowitz, the publisher of FinAid.org, has calculated that a student borrower would only pay an additional $761.

What the media has also largely ignored is that the interest rate has only been as low as 3.4 percent for the 2011-2012 school year. As recently as 2007, the subsidized rate was 6.8 percent. 

Here are the rates of the subsidized Stafford Loans in recent years:

- 2008: 6.0 percent
- 2009: 5.6 percent
- 2010 4.5 percent
- 2011 3.4 percent

What press accounts also typically fail to mention is that students who have borrowed subsidized Stafford Loans in the past will keep the lower rates for those loans. 

A more important college affordability issue
So what financial aid issue is far more important than this rate hike snafu?

An critical issue is the fate of the Pell Grant, the federal lifeline for poor and middle-income students, which has been political football for years. There wasn't a huge outcry when Congress made it much more difficult for poor Americans to qualify for the full Pell Grant of $5,550. During the past academic year, families that made $32,000 or less automatically qualified for the maximum Pell Grant, but for the coming year families must make no more than $23,000.

Now that's a travesty.

[mreddish]

This was a very well written article. When you crunch the numbers the amount it adds per month is really not that great,e but the total sum the government will have to come up with to cover the difference reaches some $7 billion. For more information on student debt and interest see these articles:

http://americanactionforum.org/topic/legacy-debt

http://policyinterns.com/2012/06/22/higher-education-and-consumerism-4/

[theloneconsumer]

There is a drag on income for higher degrees and monthly payments of loans from higher education. Because the student loans are deferred or forbearances occur while students are completing their degree, an additional 3.4% in interest is compounded. That is in addition to the unpaid interest (from unsubsidized loans ) that is added to the principal for 3-7 years for Masters and Doctorate degrees.

If TARP loans with low rates went to Wall Street Banks, why not low interest loans for middle class America? The banks aren't giving us low credit card rates.

[hypnotoad72]

If we're supposed to compete, costs MUST come down.

Most instructors get paid $50k and require a Masters degree, which is not inexpensive...

And as more people don't go to college, the schools will have to use layoffs...

They will use other means to look good as well. Such as grade inflation, and most colleges are NOT unionized... (how little it takes to show how scapegoating unions, public sector teachers, and teacher unions has been so blindly overhyped...

Anybody whose eyes and ears are open knows we're headed for a massive disaster.

[Meg003]

"During the past academic year, families that made $32,000 or less automatically qualified for the maximum Pell Grant, but for the coming year families must make no more than $32,000." I believe for the upcoming year the figure is $23,000; the second figure seems to be a typo.

[sjc_1]

Interest rates are low, but now they want to make another $6 billion from poor students while they give oil companies $4 billion in tax breaks and the wealthy $70 billion in tax breaks. Education is an investment in America and we should not saddle students with any more debt than they already have.

[hypnotoad72]

Well said, thank you!!

Especially as we're told we need more education to compete and there ARE some truths to that as my previous degree is fairly worthless and, contrary to what relatives tell me, society doesn't operate the way it had 40+ years ago. But before I digress into how good the middle class used to have it...

Multinational companies get all the "free market" benefits and helping hands, but anyone who isn't at the top of these companies, wanting a break or a helping hand because of wages or other economic conditions having been skewed by the multinationals, is called "socialist". Especially as multinationals continue to offshore, then get more handouts and complete bailouts AT OUR EXPENSE. (emphasis added, it's not meant to be a "shout" per se...)

Ugh... where is the justice...