GovernmentExecutive.com

Return to Article: House votes to include feds in student loan repayment program

• 57924
  

  I heard about the student loan forgiveness program for teachers and was excited to know that I could help paying back my student loans. I then find out that Im not eligible although Ive been teaching special education for 6 years because I started school in 1997 and the loans have to be from after October 1998. It's rediciulous that this date is an eligibitlity requirement because many teachers I graduated with have student loans that they're stuggling to pay back due to low salary.

  Rachael Posted September 7, 2008 7:30 PM
• 16775
  

  It's another example of the haves in the government getting a benefit at the expense of the have-nots in the government and the taxpayers. As a "veteran" of a DoD agency I worked for many years, I observed many goodies allegedly aimed at giving the "disadvantaged" a leg up, including upward mobility programs, hiring of "superior student," reclassifying people that don't have a bachelor's degrees engineers because they had the qualifying experience (subjectively evaluated). And now paying for select students' educational loans. As a result, the agencies have many people that are in jobs that don't exist in the real world and are overpaid for what they actually do. This perpetuates the machine of political patronage.

  Most of these programs are just for the haves, of which many can't (or won't) stand on their own feet. The ones that preferred to be self-sufficient and work for what they wanted (and not kiss up to the managers) either didn't hear about these programs, the program didn't "apply" to their situation, or they had to fight for (and be ultimately denied) the benefits of a program that they were legally entitled to. That's why I am an ex-civil servant.

  Dis-Gruntled

  GovExec.com reader Posted May 18, 2006 8:29 AM
• 16576
  

  I've been employed as a registered nurse for the past two years at a Children's hospital. Both my parents and myself tried to pay off my education as I went through school, but with the rising costs of college, I still have an overwhelming debt to pay off. My interest alone is $10,000 on just one loan, and I have two. I love my job. I love to serve children every day part time in the hospital and in an elementary school setting. I do believe that a nurses and teachers make a difference in children's lives, and sometimes it goes unnoticed.

  I'm not trying to speak for anyone else or get pity from anyone, but the public should know that in a school system, you see teachers and nurses with a lot of heart and love for what they do, and the burn out comes quickly. This is my first year at an elementary school, and talking with another nurse, she loves it too but finds it hard to live on the salary and pay off her school loans without needed the extra pay you can receive in the hospital. I know my debt is large for an education that will benefit others for as long as I work, and it's hard. I think every little bit helps when there's someone nice enough out there to grant nurses/teachers some relief in loan payments. I know for others who have paid off their loans it may not seem fair; I wish I was in your place everyday. I know that I'm a hard worker and will pay it off someday, but I also want a home, a family, and I want to save so my kids can go to college. But with my salary and debt, my future to have that only depends on another income. So, any kind of help would benefit not only me, but for so many hard working teachers, nurses, and other service workers!

  Melanie Posted May 4, 2006 3:05 PM
• 15910
  

  I oppose the payoff of loans because it is unfair to everyone except recent borrowing grads. Why do we penalize those that paid for their education and reward those that borrow? This country has to stop encouraging borrowing and spending and start promoting saving! This is just another example of government taking care of itself at the expense of the taxpayers. My experience in government demonstrates that the longer they are there the harder it is for them to adopt new ideas -- such as the current accrual accounting process. This does not make them dumb but inflexible -- they cannot see the forest for the trees. Most do not even know there is a forest!

  If you borrow to go to college you should repay the loan! The education achieve probably made it possible for you to get the job that enables the repayment. I do agree that college education is far too expensive today. The college expense is because every school thinks it is a research institution and not a teaching institution. Therefore, college faculty do not work 40 hour weeks and generally only teach two preparations a semester. I think it is time that colleges start professors with a five course load each semester and three preparations. As the professors progress in research they should be given a reduced load but only after they prove they are contributing something worthwhile to society with their research. Doing the research for the newer professors would be extra work on their part to demonstrate an ability that the college would reward only after the results are proven -- we would stop paying on the come.

  This would reduce the need for the great number of professors our colleges have today and reduce the cost of the faculty at the colleges. This in turn should reduce the cost of the education as demonstrated by tuition. Likewise, a lower faculty cost would mean that more facilities and scholarships could be financed from the funds obtained from donations, endowment income and patent filing. Colleges are so poorly administered today it is shameful and the federal government should not encourage that to continue by paying off the cost of those that just happen to get federal loans.

  Taxpayer Posted April 5, 2006 8:05 AM
• 15816
  

  How about offering them $5,000 bucks to go into Iraq and see how willing they would be to take the job, before we start handing out millions in taxpayer dollars for them to work behind a desk. After all, a government employee should be the first to offer up their services to protect this country. It would be useless to mention the thousands in government employment, including elected officials who haven't however. Maybe it is time we stop putting people in public office who do not wear this country's uniform, before being elected. It is called patriotism.

  Charlie (retired military) Posted March 31, 2006 7:38 PM
• 15812
  

  I think we all know you don't attract the best simply by offering more money, but it is an OK incentive. What needs to occur to make this a win-win for both sides is that when hiring for positions where the agency would consider this option, then certain credentials from prospective candidates must be mandatory (i.e. strong GPA, degree appropriate to the position being filled, strong writing and communication skills, etc). I do not think we need all "A" students. Like life in general, it takes all kinds and just because you make an A doesn't mean you get it. Just think, if we aim too high, we would not even consider hiring a guy like Bill Gates!

  GovExec.com reader Posted March 31, 2006 5:53 PM
• 15806
  

  Dear Engineer, Stuff it! Where do you get off with the comment that, "Unfortunately many of these new hires are only "C" or "B" students; they are not the cream of the crop..."? Any engineering degree is difficult to obtain -- perhaps that is why our dear old Uncle entices "B" students with a GS-7 vice a GS-5 starting salary.

  You must be another one of them team players we always hear about!

  Cracked & Wired Posted March 31, 2006 1:29 PM
• 15791
  

  My concern is that this program, while well intentioned, will turn out to be just like that of professional starting salaries. Young engineers graduating from college are discovering that private industry is not hiring and that when it is, starting salaries are only in the $30K to $40K range. The government is offering these new hires salaries in the $45K to $60K range and is attracting a large number of the new graduates. Unfortunately many of these new hires are only "C" or "B" students; they are not the cream of the crop that the program advocates promised that it would acquire. They flock to the government for the pay. The "A" students are still seeking employment in private industry and finding one in the government is rare. When talking with many of the new hires the sentiment is nearly always the same -- it's a job and the pay is good.

  I predict that this student loan payoff program will attract the same type of grads and will not achieve the objectives as intended.

  GovExec.com reader Posted March 31, 2006 8:12 AM
• 15769
  

  It's a nice gesture to hire new federal employees by paying back their loans, but let's face reality. Under the current federal deficit, we can't afford it. People who graduate from college with student loans can extend the time of their loans (up to 30 years).

  Somewhere in the Pacific Posted March 30, 2006 7:32 PM