July 8, 2019

Regulatory Rollback on Student Loans Takes Away Borrower Protections
By Charlene Crowell

(TriceEdneyWire.com) - Every Fourth of July celebrates this nation’s founding. But this year, only a few days before the annual freedom celebration, an ill-advised governmental action financially doomed rather than freed millions of student loan borrowers – as of July 1. Moreover, this action arrives as the cost of higher education continues to soar and household incomes remain largely stagnant.

On June 28, the Department of Education announced the end of an important student loan regulation that since 2015 has held colleges with career training programs accountable for failure to provide an education that resulted in marketable skills and earnings high enough to repay student loans.

Known as the Gainful Employment rule, it required career and technical training programs that receive federal financial aid to prove that students would receive the education promised or forfeit future federal funding dollars. Additionally, covered institutions and programs were required to disclose to prospective students the career earnings and student debts of recent graduates.

In other words, the rule was intended to rein in abusive schools before they could harm students or waste taxpayer-funded aid.

Finalized in 2014, the rule was too late to help the tens of thousands of student borrowers affected by the failures of huge for-profit institutions, Corinthian Colleges, and ITT Technical Institute. Borrowers at these now-shuttered colleges were left without degrees, or credits that could be transferred, but carried with them unaffordable debts that have devastated the stability of their families. These closures also resulted in massive losses to taxpayers who fund federal financial aid.

Even so, the Gainful Employment rule has been effective in two other ways. First, it pushed many other for-profit institutions to cut their worst performing programs. Secondly, it controlled tuition costs. Either violation brought regulatory sanctions.

Now, instead of these protections, consumers are left on their own -- directed to an expanded web resources known as a ‘College Scorecard’ where information on student debt and earnings now includes 2,100 certificate-granting programs.

“These important reforms are a more complete and effective way to hold all types of higher education institutions accountable and make sure that students have a full suite of data when making a decision about their education,” said Secretary DeVos in a statement.

Saying that information is the equivalent of regulation is simply not true. Effective regulations impose penalties, fines, and conditions on future actions – all to deter bad actors from repeating behaviors. By contrast, information only discloses with no guarantee that what is shared will be truthful, complete, or current.

Elected officials and consumer advocates were quick to point out the shortcomings of student loan deregulation.

“[B]y eliminating this rule without enforcing any alternative standard the Education Department is giving low-quality, for-profit colleges a free pass to charge high tuition for worthless credentials that leave students with insurmountable debt,” noted U.S. Representative Bobby Scott, chairman of the House Committee on Education and Labor.

“Students need protection against unaffordable loans,” said James Kvaal, President of The Institute for College Access & Success (TICAS). “This rule rolls back the clock on those very protections. At a time when millions of borrowers are struggling with debt they cannot afford, the Department’s repeal of the gainful employment rule is reckless and irresponsible.”

The ills that TICAS’ Kvaal points out are well-documented.

A 2018 research report entitled, The State of For-Profit Colleges, by the Center for Responsible Lending (CRL) analyzed student debt on a state-by-state basis. It concluded that investing in a for-profit education is almost always a risky proposition. Undergraduate borrowing by state showed that the percentage of students that borrow from the federal government generally ranged between 40 to 60 percent for public colleges, compared to 50 to 80 percent at for-profit institutions.

CRL also found that women and Blacks suffer disparate impacts, particularly at for-profit institutions, where they are disproportionately enrolled in most states.  For example, enrollment at Mississippi’s for-profit colleges was 78 percent female and nearly 66 percent Black. Other states with high Black enrollment at for-profits included Georgia (57 percent), Louisiana (55 percent), Maryland (58 percent) and North Carolina (54 percent).

“Betsy DeVos’ decision to eliminate this important education protection is a disservice to the public and only serves to put corporate interests ahead of struggling students and taxpayers,” said Debbie Goldstein a CRL Executive Vice President, following the recent rescission of the Gainful Employment rule. “Completely removing oversight of these programs and leaving parents and students to navigate the college loan system is irresponsible and wastes federal money on programs that aren’t performing.”

Similarly to CRL, the National Consumer Law Center (NCLC) has found that for-profit college students borrow more, and more often. More than 80 percent of for-profit college graduates incurred nearly $40,000 in debt at the time of graduation. Further, Black and Latino student loan borrowers were found to default on their loans at twice the rate of similarly situated whites.

“Repealing the Gainful Employment rule will cost taxpayers over $6 billion over the next decade, and ending this rule will worsen the student loan debt crisis, especially for the people of color and low-income students who disproportionately attend career education programs and who are often targets of predatory recruitment practices," said Abby Shafroth, an NCLC attorney who works with its Student Loan Borrower Assistance Project. "The Department’s unfounded claims that students will benefit from “more access” as a result of the repeal are bogus: Students don’t need access to more failing schools, they need a student loan system that doesn’t set them up to fail.”

With 44 million student borrowers owing $1.5 trillion nationwide at the end of 2019’s first quarter, removing federal guard rails against future borrower risk is as costly as it is unsustainable. As the federal government turns its back on these borrowers, perhaps another level of government can and will fill the void.

“Now more than ever,” concluded Goldstein, “states have important roles to play in regulation, oversight, and enforcement.”

Charlene Crowell is the Center for Responsible Lending’s Communications Deputy Director. She can be reached at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..

July 8, 2019

Running for Exposure
By Julianne Malveaux

(TriceEdneyWire.com) - Twenty-four people are running for the Democratic nomination for President of the United States. From where I sit, at least half of them are only running for exposure, for the Vice-Presidential nod, for Cabinet secretary, to push a platform, or to simply be seen. Their ambitions have made the process turgid and impractical, often amusing and only sometimes illuminating.

The candidates do best when they have time to expound on their ideas, as they did at Rev. William Barber's Poor People's Congress on June 17, or at Rev. Jesse Jackson's National Rainbow Coalition International Convention June 28-July 2. Barber's meeting drew nine candidates, each who had the opportunity to give a four-minute speech and 26 minutes of questioning from Rev. Barber. The Rainbow PUSH gathering drew seven candidates who had about 15 minutes to address those assembled. Vice-President Biden, Senator Elizabeth Warren, and Mayors Bill Di Blasio and Pete Buttigieg had press conferences with Rev. Jackson. Senators Harris and Booker did not attend Rev. Jackson’s meeting, although Harris did get to Rev. Barber’s and pledged to support a debate dedicated to poverty issues. With a crowded field and calendar, it is clear that everybody can’t be everywhere, but I’d like the two African American Senators to explain why they snubbed Rev Jackson, a leader who provided the very foundation for them to run for office.

Memo to Andrew Yang, Marianne Williamson, Montana Governor Steve Bullock, Miramar, FL Mayor Wayne Messam, and a few others, what are you running for, really? You've got ideas – doesn't everybody? But you have about as good a chance of being President as the proverbial snowball has a chance of surviving Hades. You've raised a little money, and you've got a skeleton staff. Why not sit home and write op-eds about your good ideas? Somebody will publish them.

Memo to California Congressman Eric Swalwell – age baiting is neither thoughtful nor cute.   It's fine to tell Vice-President Joe Biden to "pass the torch" once, but to say it more than once seems like badgering and makes you look like a junior high school heckler. Biden should have come back at you for hedging your bets. You told the San Francisco Chronicle that, while you are running for President, you haven't closed the door on keeping your congressional seat. You have until December to decide, you say. Do us all a favor. Decide now!

Memo to Beto O'Rourke. Just like the South lost the Civil War, you lost the Senate race in 2018. Losing a statewide competition is hardly the foundation for a successful Presidential run. You were a nondescript Congressman that sponsored little legislation, a Democratic sensation mainly because you came close to toppling the odious Senator Cruz. But what do you stand for other than white male exuberance, jumping up on tables with the wild hand gestures? Run for Senate in Texas again. Maybe you'd win and really make a difference!

Memo to Julian Castro. Don't patronize your own community by speaking Spanish poorly. I think Latino people care more about your policy positions than your Spanish language ability. Good move in going after Beto O'Rourke in the debates on immigration issues. Wrong move in missing the Poor People's Congress after confirming that you'd be there.

Memo to Vice-President Biden. You're better than your act, better than your debate performance, better than your wandering, long-winded speeches. I know you've been doing you for a long time, and the wordy gaffes seem to work for you. Actually, they don't. There's nothing wrong with saying you made a mistake, nothing wrong with apologizing to Anita Hill, which you haven't done yet, nothing wrong with talking about busing unapologetically. If you don't get your act together, Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris are going to make mincemeat out of you.

It's only July, seven long months before the February 3, 2020, Iowa caucuses. Only July, eight months before the delegate-rich Super Tuesday, March 3, 2020, when at least 15 states, including Texas and California, will hold primaries, and 1321 Democratic delegates will be up for grabs. It's the beginning of July, and by month's end, there will be yet another debate with 20 people on the stage in two clumps. We won't learn much at these debates, because they are less debate than guided conversation with interruptions and outbursts.

Julianne Malveaux is an author and economist. Her latest project MALVEAUX! On UDCTV is available on youtube.com. For booking, wholesale inquiries or for more info visit www.juliannemalveaux.com

July 8, 2019

(TriceEdneyWire.com)  - Can you believe #45 who went to the White House with the help of Russians stood before the world and bragged about Frederick Douglas with no recognition of why Douglass didn’t celebrate the 4^th of July? He bragged about Harriet Tubman—a woman he refuses to place on the $20.00 bill simply because President Obama set it up. Does he know the student protesters who sat in at the Woolworth counter in North Carolina were not bragging about how great America is? As he put on his expensive show, I wonder if he thought about the men in New York that he declared were guilty, but still hasn’t said he was sorry or wrong. Do you think they were celebrating with Trump about the wonders of America’s justice system?

He had the unmitigated gall to brag about women gaining the right to vote and about the Civil Rights Movement. Women are still trying to get an Equal Rights Amendment and daily we work to save the rights our ancestors often died to gain. Many of the things he uttered are things his party and he are trying to destroy.

Children at the border are crying out to be treated like human beings, and he never mentioned their plight that “only he can change” but doesn’t. All he has to say about the family separation and squalid conditions in which they live is they should’ve stayed where they came from. Forget about America’s welcoming words of “Give me your tired, your poor….”

Did he even notice only a handful of people of color were there in his cheering squad? He only invited special friends and donors. We do not even matter, but we knew that before he read his often-erroneous lines. Like slaveowners, lynch mobs and other racists he did nothing to make us feel better or believe he had anything in mind to improve our lives. Obviously, he’s never read Frederick Douglass’ “What to the Slave is the 4^th of July?” What Douglass said long ago still has meaning to this day.

Trump was okay having people he invited to make him look good sitting in the rain while he bragged about things somebody wrote for him and that he showed no understanding of what he was saying. He said there’s nothing America cannot do, so what is he waiting for?

Where’s his health care plan for all? Decent home for all? Livable wage plan for all? Climate change plan? Structural improvement plan? Where are his aspirational words for the future of all Americans? He read from a teleprompter words someone wrote for him without even recognizing the errors.

We could’ve read what he said much faster because we wouldn’t have had to constantly stop and applaud ourselves. Who brags about war and destruction? This wasn’t a day celebrating our military. We do that on Veterans’ Day because all of us have had kin who fought and died in America’s wars.

This was an occasion to soothe his fragile ego. It was a waste of taxpayers’ money. We gained nothing from a flyover where most of us were indoors avoiding the rain. Those of us who live in the District of Columbia just had more of our tax dollars spent to make him feel like his “strongman” buddies Putin, Kim Jong-Un and others.

His salute wasn’t for the masses. Most of what he talked about we learned in our history classes in grade school. He claims the generals are his while he was a draft dodger who now pretends he loves the military!

There comes a time when you just can’t take it anymore. Come on people, Congress and Courts. Do something.

(Dr. E. Faye Williams is National President of the National Congress of Black Women (www.nationalcongressbw.org) and host of “Wake Up and Stay Woke’ on WPFW-FM 89.3.)

July 1, 2019

Supreme Court Sent Mixed Civil Rights Signals As America Celebrated July 4th
By Hamil R. Harris

(TriceEdneyWire.com) - On the eve of America’s celebration of its 243^rd Independence Day, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down rulings that sent mixed messages to Civil Rights groups at a time when President Trump and Republicans hope to tilt the 2020 presidential elections their way.

In a 5-4 decision, the court ruled that the issue of partisan gerrymandering (drawing district lines in order to achieve political outcomes) does not belong in federal court and should be decided by state legislatures. Conservatives applauded that decision because it comes on the eve of the 2020 Census when state lawmakers configure districts often to benefit whatever party controls their particular state.

While the court rejected challenges to Republican-drawn congressional districts in North Carolina and a Democratic district in Maryland, the decision was still a major blow to critics who have argued for years that partisan manipulation of electoral maps unfairly results in single-party political control. The 5-4 decision fell along traditional conservative-liberal lines. Conservative Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Chief Justice John Roberts voted to keep the redistricting cases out of the federal courts. And liberal justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer voted to maintain federal jurisdiction over the cases. 

Speaking for the conservative majority, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote that while redistricting plans “are highly partisan by any measure,” the Supreme Court and lower courts are not the venues to settle these disputes. With this decision, Civil Rights groups say the court is giving state houses, mostly controlled by Republicans, more power to tilt things in their ideological direction.

But writing for the four dissenting judges, Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan, who was appointed by President Obama, said, “For the first time ever, this court refuses to remedy a constitutional violation because it thinks the task beyond judicial capabilities.”

In the case of Rucho V. Common Cause and Lamone v. Benisek, NAACP President Derrick Johnson, said in a statement, “The Court’s rulings are allowing party politics to determine the outcomes of our elections…Extreme partisan gerrymandering has infected our electoral process for far too long. Exercise of the franchise, which many fought and even died for, must not be reduced to a political charade in which the outcomes are predetermined. In America, voters should choose their representatives instead of representatives choosing their voters.”

Johnson concluded that the high court should have halted what the NAACP and other civil rights advocates consider unconstitutional conduct, but it did not. Therefore, he contends, this is a throwback racism of the past.

“In racially polarized environments like North Carolina where racial block voting is standard, today’s decision will license policymakers to mask racial intent as partisan gerrymandering in order to suppress votes and prevent communities from fully participating in democracy to elect candidates of their choice,” Johnson stated.

The court’s decision basically reverses the outcome of rulings in Maryland, Michigan, North Carolina and Ohio, where lower courts had ordered new maps drawn and it ends proceedings in Wisconsin, where a retrial was supposed to take place later this summer.

On the other hand, the NAACP and members of the Congressional Black Caucus applauded the court ruling in the case of the Department of Commerce v. New York that blocks the Trump Administration’s attempt to insert a citizenship question into the 2020 Census based on the pretext of enforcing the Voting Rights Act (VRA).

“I am very pleased that the Supreme Court ruled today that the Trump Administration may not add the citizenship question to the 2020 Census based on the Administration’s claim that it was trying to protect voting rights,” said Rep. Elijah E. Cummings (D-Md.), referring to the 5-4 decision where Robert’s decided with the most liberal leaning justices on the bench.

Cummings, Chairman of the House Oversight and Government Operations Committee, challenged President Trump’s move from the very beginning after his Secretary of Commerce added the citizenship question to the upcoming 2020 Census form.

“Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross testified before Congress that the Trump Administration was adding the citizenship question to the census ‘solely’ at the request of the Justice Department to help enforce the Voting Rights Act,” Cummings said in a statement. “The Supreme Court has now eviscerated this claim, calling it a ‘pretext,’ ‘contrived,’ and ‘incongruent with what the record reveals.’

Some have suggested that Secretary Ross could go back and offer other reasons for adding the citizenship question. However, any claim now that the Trump Administration had other reasons for adding the citizenship question would directly contradict Secretary Ross’ sworn testimony that helping the Justice Department enforce the Voting Rights Act was the Administration’s sole purpose.

Johnson said that the NAACP also welcomed the court ruling, which he said stopped the Trump administration’s fraudulent efforts to suppress votes in the upcoming Presidential election.

“Through various means, the Trump administration is deliberately seeking to undercount communities of color in the 2020 Census, a ploy designed to increase the political power of Whites at the expense of already underrepresented communities,” Johnson said. “Weakening the political representation of communities of color has been a stain on our democracy since its founding. The Three-Fifths Compromise of the Constitutional Convention in 1787 counted enslaved black people as three-fifths of a person in apportioning congressional districts. Since that time, the Census has severely undercounted the communities of color.”

This week President Trump has planned a huge 4^th of July celebration, complete with a military parade and even a jet fly over in Washington DC. But Johnson wrote that President Trump would do better by stopping his effort to take Democracy away from so many vulnerable people whether it is through a census or mass deportations scheduled sometimes after the holiday.

“The citizenship question was not made for the reasons put forth by Secretary Ross,” Johnson said. “Rather, it was a bald-faced effort to benefit one race and one political party at the expense of some of our nation’s most vulnerable communities. This astounding truth can no longer be swept under the rug. It is there for all to see.”