Both sides of the debate
Strong claims exist on each side. This page mirrors how AP Gov expects you to articulate competing constitutional and policy visions before you stake your own claim.
The case for relief
Key figures: Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, President Biden (2021 to 2025 agenda), Rep. Ayanna Pressley.
- Economic mobility: monthly payments crowd out saving; reducing balances can free spending that supports local economies.
- Racial equity: Black borrowers, on average, owe more and take longer to pay down debt than white peers. Cancellation is framed as a wealth-gap intervention.
- Broken promise: college was sold as a path to stability while states disinvested from public campuses. Borrowers did what policymakers asked.
Proposed solutions
- Substantial or full cancellation for federal loans
- Expand and simplify IDR; auto-enrollment for delinquency risk
- Free community college and larger Pell grants
- Progressive revenue options (often described as taxing Wall Street trades or ultra-high wealth) to offset costs
Warren-style argument (paraphrased): targeted cancellation can shrink the racial wealth gap because student debt is concentrated among Black and brown borrowers who were steered into borrowing by decades of policy.
The case against cancellation
Key figures: Betsy DeVos, Sen. John Thune, Rep. Virginia Foxx, Trump administration officials.
- Fairness: millions repaid loans or chose cheaper paths. Broad cancellation rewards a subset at taxpayer expense.
- Inflation & incentives: sudden forgiveness may boost demand while creating a moral hazard for future borrowers and colleges that raise prices.
- Separation of powers: big structural changes should come from Congress, not unilateral executive action, consistent with Biden v. Nebraska.
Proposed alternatives
- Income Share Agreements and private market tools (debated)
- Bigger investments in vocational training and apprenticeships
- Institutional accountability: colleges with high default rates share financial risk ("skin in the game")
- Caps or elimination of Graduate PLUS lending
Common conservative argument (paraphrased): blanket cancellation asks plumbers and nurses to subsidize lawyers and doctors who voluntarily signed promissory notes.
A centrist read on the evidence
Economists genuinely disagree on the net effect of large-scale cancellation. The Penn Wharton Budget Model estimated that certain broad forgiveness proposals could add on the order of $300 to $500 billion to deficits over a decade, depending on income caps and take-up. Other researchers emphasize multiplier effects: freed-up cash for younger households can lift consumption, support small businesses, and reduce defaults that already cost the government money.
For an AP Gov lens, the lesson is institutional: the CBO, universities, borrowers, and bond markets all respond to different incentives, so "solve student debt" is really dozens of policy levers, not one speech.