Student Debt Forgiveness, An Increasingly Debated Election Issue

Early last year, it seemed that free community college tuition and student loan forgiveness would be slam dunk achievements for the newly inaugurated President Biden. Especially because of First Lady Jill Biden’s close personal connection to these two issues; she continues to teach at a Virginia community college and is passionate about student affordability and accessibility. But now, 18 months later, the free college tuition proposal has died along with the huge social spending bill it was attached to in 2022. It has fallen victim to inflation.

The same fate may happen to broad student debt forgiveness bills. The Biden administration has successfully forgiven some $2 billion in school debt of students who could prove they were defrauded by certain for-profit colleges. More may be possible under a borrower defense regulation that Democrats hope will happen before the midterm election. But programs offering broad student debt relief – some call it “a loan bailout” – seem increasingly unlikely. Many voices call the idea “unfair” to those who took years to pay off their loans and delayed marriage, home buying and children to do so; these voices may be more than those advocating for relief for students struggling with increasing debt. President Biden could offer a debt relief package through an executive order – but the money would have to come out of already budgeted items; no president can appropriate unapproved funds. Plus, there is the old complaint that raising student debt relief takes pressure off school officials to cut costs.

Cuellar/Cisneros Race Heats Up Over Abortion

As attention to the Democratic primary battle in Texas between two Hispanics heated up in the weeks before the May 24 election, one factor everyone was talking about was that nine-time incumbent Henry Cuellar is “the only pro-life moderate left in the Democratic Congress” while his opponent Jessica Cisneros is adamantly pro-choice (now called pro-decision by the politically correct). Cuellar opposes Democratic federal legislation that would make abortion legal throughout the nation, although he supports restrictions and exceptions to abortion bans. Cisneros supports federal funding to make abortions easier to access and afford at just about any time in the pregnancy. Maybe these significant differences in their views and their appeal can be attributed to their age: he is 66; she is 28. In this case, being Latino is not a deciding factor: A Wall Street Journal poll found Hispanic voters split almost 50/50 between pro and anti-abortion. The 28th Congressional District in Texas is almost 80 percent Hispanic.

At its core, the tension seems to be due to the competition between moderate Democrats and progressives. An interesting supporter for Cuellar is Rep. James Clyburn (D-SC), whom the media often refer to as the Democratic Party’s King Maker – since he is credited for Joe Biden winning Super Election Tuesday in 2020. “I look at people who are willing to work with other people,” Clyburn told the WSJ, referring to Cuellar. Many believe that if progressive Cisneros wins Cuellar’s seat, voters will choose a Republican.

The December 1st SCOTUS Oral Argument on Abortion Explains Everything

It was one of the best oral arguments ever, long-time observers of the Supreme Court have said about the two-hour Dec.1st, 2021, oral arguments for Dobbs vs. the Jackson Health Clinic. That’s the Mississippi abortion law that has the potential to overturn Roe vs. Wade -- the national right to abortion law passed in 1973. Roe vs. Wade had become established law, a precedent not usually subject to being overturned. But now, it is being strongly challenged, and on December 1st, the biggest question the judges repeatedly asked attorneys to answer was, “What are the constitutional principles you want us to consider in this abortion case?”

To be clear, Dobbs V. Jackson Women’s Health is not about Roe V. Wade. This case is only about determining the constitutionality of a restrictive state abortion law passed in Mississippi in 2018 that bans access to an abortion after 15 weeks of pregnancy (gestational age). It does not make all abortions illegal, even in Mississippi. It does not wipe out Roe vs. Wade as a national law. No other state has to abide by it. But if SCOTUS finds Dobbs to be constitutional, it would allow other states to decide what the access to abortion could be in their state. SCOTUS’ decision boils down to the constitutional issues involved.

Yes, the constitutional issues. That’s the primary duty of the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS): to decide if a challenged law is constitutional or not. On December 1st, while hundreds of advocates from pro-choice and anti-abortion positions marched, waved signs and banners and noisily made their emotional points outside the Supreme Court—enough to be heard slightly in the courtroom - inside was calm and civil. In an unusual two hours of discussion, broadcast live, both sides made outstanding logical, legal and practical arguments for the constitutional principles upholding their arguments. And therein lies the problem. The basic constitutional principles argued on both sides are legitimate and compelling. But they completely conflict with each other.

The pro-choice side argued passionately for a woman’s constitutional right to privacy and the right to decide solely about what happens to her body. “The ability to abort a child should be protected,” President Biden said on May 3.

The pro-life side argued that the very preamble of the constitution guarantees every citizen the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. “There is no getting around that abortion is about killing a human being,” said Justices Kavanaugh and others.

The judges also discussed at length about when a fetus, a child in the womb, could be considered independent of the mother, i.e., viable. Roe vs. Wade first proposed 24 weeks, but live healthy births earlier than that are now done. Most European countries allow abortions up to 15 weeks, the limit in the Mississippi law. Some advocates say abortions can be done until birth; others say never after fertilization. “These are scientific, religious and medical decisions that can’t be made by nine black-robed appointed justices,” concluded several justices. “Let the people decide!”

The possible decision to uphold the Mississippi law and send the whole abortion issue back to voters is the purported leaning of the February preliminary decision draft, leaked by someone at the Supreme Court to POLITICO on May 4. The leaked decision has caused weeks of protests, vandalism and death threats to SCOTUS justices and legislators. But it should not be surprising. That the unique life/death decision of abortion should be decided by representatives of the people of the nation or a state, was well articulated in the oral arguments. •