Connect with us

U.S.

Senate Overturns DeVos Rule Limiting Debt Relief for Defrauded Students

Published

on

  • The Senate has voted to overturn a Trump administration rule that would make it harder for students who were defrauded by for-profit colleges to have their loans forgiven or reduced. 
  • Education Secretary Betsy Devos’ changes require applicants to individually prove a school knowingly misled them and that they were financially harmed by the deception, among other difficult measures aimed at limiting who gets assistance. 
  • The legislation will now go to President Donald Trump’s desk for him to decide whether or not to uphold the rule with a veto or side with Congress against his own education secretary.

What Is DeVos’ Rule? 

The Senate voted Wednesday to overturn a Trump administration rule that would limit debt relief for students who were defrauded by for-profit colleges. 

In a 53-42 vote, 10 Republicans joined Democrats to pass the resolution, which has already been approved by the House. This decision is a bipartisan rebuke of Education Secretary Betsy DeVos’ rule, aimed at weakening an Obama-era policy. 

The Obama-era-updated “borrower defense” rule allowed for students who attended schools that committed serious fraud to request that their loan debt be forgiven. It was meant to regulate the for-profit sector and protect students whose colleges engaged in misconduct. It was updated in the wake of the collapse of schools like ITT Tech and Corinthian. 

But DeVos made changes that raised the bar for borrowers’ relief claims. Her adjustments made it so that applicants had to individually prove a school knowingly misled them and that they were financially harmed by the deception. It also set a three-year deadline on claims.

According to the New York Times, the education department later adopted a complicated formula for calculating relief that limits nearly all applicants to only partial relief and required the majority to repay most of their loans. 

Arguments For and Against It 

The rule change is scheduled to take effect in July and the Education Department argues that it protects community colleges, historically back colleges, and taxpayers “from undue harm from the poorly written Obama-era regulation.”

DeVos has slammed the debt-relief system as a “free money” giveaway and told members of Congress last year that her rule would protect taxpayers from people trying to scam the system by applying for debt relief when they suffered no harm. At the time, she said those students who were defrauded would still be eligible for loan forgiveness. 

But critics of the rule said this would effectively kill the department’s loan forgiveness program by setting requirements that almost no borrowers would be able to meet. “The burden of proof for these students is so absurdly unrealistic,” said Representative Susie Lee, Democrat of Nevada, who sponsored a companion resolution in the House.

“We don’t believe your life should be ruined because some school lied to you about the education they were promising, the loans you were taking out. We believe that you deserve a second chance in life,” said Democrat Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois, who sponsored the legislation.

Democrats also stressed that the original loan forgiveness law, which has been around since 1995, was rarely used until for-profit chains started falling apart in 2014. 

So far, the Education Department has approved 51,000 loan-relief applications. Nearly all of them were approved during the Obama administration and the department has eliminated some $535 million in debt. Under DeVos, the department stopped processing the applications while the rewrite was challenged in court. There are currently about 170,000 pending applications.

The American Legion and dozens of other veterans groups also backed the effort to overturn the rewritten rules. The focus on veterans attracted much Republican support because veterans have long been targetted with predatory recruitment tactics thanks to their lucrative G.I. Bill benefits. 

The benefits are particularly attractive to for-profit schools because federal law requires those schools to obtain at least 10% of their revenue from sources other than Education Department-backed student loans.

Trump Has Veto Power 

After the decision, Department of Education spokeswoman Angela Morabito said, “It’s disappointing to see so many in Congress fooled by misinformation from the Left and the fake news narrative about our efforts to protect students from fraud.” 

“Students, including veterans, who are defrauded by their school and suffer financial harm as a result deserve relief, and our rule provides them relief,” she added.

The legislation will now go to President Donald Trump’s desk for him to decide whether or not to uphold the rule with a veto or side with Congress against his own education secretary. The White House has already threatened a veto but several outlets reported that Trump told Senate Republicans on Tuesday that he is “neutral” on repealing the rule.

“I have sort of a neutral position,” Trump allegedly said according to people in the room. “I’m in between.”

The White House did not dispute those reports but instead pointed to a statement from the administration released in February. That statement said Trump’s advisors would recommend he veto the resolution and defended DeVos’ plan, saying it “restores due process, the rule of law and student choice.”

A source close to the president told The New York Times that DeVos called Trump after his “neutral” comment. They said Trump supports finding a solution to the loan problem but doesn’t feel strongly about DeVos’ approach. However, Politico reported that after speaking over the phone, Trump indicated that he would vote in favor of DeVos’ regulations. 

So at this time, it’s unclear what Trump will decide, but a veto wouldn’t be unlikely. At a news conference on the resolution Wednesday, Durbin said he will work hard to get the votes needed for a veto override if the president rejects the measure.

See what others are saying: (The New York Times) (CNN) (Politico) 


U.S.

Ohio Police Fatally Shoot Black Teenage Girl

Published

on

  • Ma’Khia Bryant, a 16-year-old Black girl, was fatally shot by a Columbus police officer Tuesday afternoon.
  • Police released body camera footage that appears to show Bryant lunging at two other women with a knife before the officer opened fire.
  • Members of Bryant’s family disputed parts of the police department’s version of events, including Bryant’s aunt, who said the teen called police and was trying to defend herself from people who had come to her foster and threatened her with physical assault.
  • The incident came just before a Minnesota jury convicted former officer Derek Chauvin for the murder of George Floyd, exacerbating frustrations over repeated police killings of Black people in America.  

Ma’Khia Bryant Shot by Police

Columbus police shot and killed a Black teenage girl Tuesday, shortly before the verdict against Derek Chauvin was convicted of murdering George Floyd, adding tension to existing conversations about excessive use of force from police against Black people.

The girl was identified as 16-year-old Ma’Khia Bryant by a spokesperson for Franklin County Children’s Services, who said she had been in foster care. 

During a news conference late Tuesday night, Columbus police said the shooting happened after they received a 911 call around 4:30 from someone who said that women were trying to stab them before hanging up.

The law enforcement officials also played segments of body camera footage from the officer who fired the shots, which they said showed the victim lunging at two others with a knife.

In the graphic video, the officer is seen getting out of his car as Bryant appears to chase someone who falls onto the sidewalk. She then lunges at another person, and the officer yells “get down” three times before quickly firing at least four shots at the teenager.

Bryant collapses on the ground, and the bodycam video shows a knife next to her as officers attempt CPR. People at the scene immediately start screaming, and one man can be heard yelling, “You didn’t have to shoot her! She’s just a kid, man!”

“She had a knife,” the officer responds. “She just went at her.”

Police officials said Bryant was taken to the hospital, where she was pronounced dead. Notably, they did not identify the officer who shot her, though they did say he would be pulled off patrol duty while the Ohio Bureau of Criminal Investigation conducts an inquiry.

Some of Bryant’s family members contradicted elements of the police report. Her aunt, Hazel Bryant, told The Daily Beast that adult women had come to the foster home and started an altercation with her niece, who called the police.

Hazel claimed that Ma’Khia grabbed the knife to defend herself and was fending off a physical assault when the police arrived. She also told a local outlet that the teenager had dropped the knife before she was shot, but the slow-motion capture of the video shown by the police appears to show the knife in her hand at the time.

Protests & Response

According to local reports, shortly after the shooting, a group of roughly 60 people gathered at the site to demonstrate but dispersed around 10 p.m. Others protesters also took the streets of downtown, with many gathering in front of the Columbus Police Department headquarters.

The shooting quickly sparked a widespread response on social media and #MKhiaBryant became a trending Twitter hashtag. Many argued that the shooting, which coincided so closely with the Chauvin verdict, shows that single instances of police accountability do not change systemic problems.

“The emotional contrast between the #DerekChauvinVerdict and the killing of #MaKhiaBryant is exactly why we must not use small wins to justify the end of large fights!” tweeted Derrick Johnson, the president of the NAACP. “We must stay steadfast in our pursuit of #PoliceAccountability WE NEED #PoliceReformNOW”

Other users also condemned the officer for immediately shooting Bryant instead of trying to de-escalate the situation or use other tactics like a Taser. Some asserted that if police can arrest white men who commit mass shootings without killing them, they can do the same for a Black teenager with a knife.

“In a world where the police can safely apprehend white male mass shooters. I would really like to know why a trained police officer assumed that the only way to deescalate a fight, where a 16 year old black girl had a knife, was to immediately shoot her dead,” one user wrote.

See what others are saying: (The New York Times) (The Daily Beast) (The Columbus Dispatch)

Continue Reading

U.S.

USDA Extends Free Meals for All Students Through June 2022

Published

on

  • The U.S Department of Agriculture will extend free meals for kids at schools and daycare facilities through the 2021-2022 school year.
  • The move will bring much-needed relief to families across the country as an estimated 12 million children are experiencing food insecurity amid the coronavirus pandemic. 
  • The extension also gives schools time to prepare and improve their current meal distribution systems without having to scramble to process a massive influx of free lunch applications at the start of the year.

USDA Call for Free Lunch Extension

The U.S Department of Agriculture announced Tuesday that it will extend free meals for children at schools and daycare facilities through the 2021-2022 school year.

In the early days of COVID-19 last March, the USDA implemented Child Nutrition waivers that cut through barriers to allow kids to eat free even outside of normal school settings and meal times.

Those waivers also allowed schools the flexibility to adapt their own programs to better meet the needs of their families. For instance, they allowed parents to do a curbside pickup of multiple days of food at once for students learning from home, even without the student being present. In many cases, they allowed for meals to be dropped off at a student’s home if they continue to learn virtually part- or full-time.

The USDA even increased the school’s meal reimbursement budgets to allow for healthier options and cover bigger costs that came due to added transportation and labor, as well as pandemic-related supply shortages for to-go boxes, Personal Protective Equipment, and more.

These waivers were only supposed to last until Sept. 30, which left a ton of families uncertain about what to do after that as many continue to struggle financially.

Helps Remove Extra Burdens

Now, the extension will bring much-needed relief to families across the country because according to the USDA, an estimated 12 million kids are experiencing food insecurity amid the coronavirus pandemic.

While celebrating more free meals for students, school nutrition groups have also pointed to the fact that this gives schools time to prepare and improve their current meal distribution systems after the surge in need this current school term.

Diane Pratt-Heavner, director of media relations for the School Nutrition Association, the trade group for school food-service manufacturers and professionals, told The Washington Post, “Schools aren’t going to have to scramble to collect applications from families that are eligible.

“At the start of every school year, this is a huge task for administrators to collect and process the applications, a task made bigger because during the pandemic there are more families eligible who may never have applied before.”

It also means fewer “touch points” like keypads that take pin numbers to prove free meal eligibility. 

See what others are saying: (The Hill) (The Washington Post) (EdSource)

Continue Reading

U.S.

Chauvin Trial Judge Says Rep. Waters Comments Could Be Grounds for Appeal

Published

on

  • Judge Peter Cahill, who is overseeing the trial of former police officer Derek Chauvin, said on Monday that Rep. Maxine Waters’ (D-Ca.) suggestion that protesters “get more confrontational” if the jury does not return a guilty verdict could be grounds for the case to be appealed.
  • Cahill’s remarks came after Chauvin’s lawyer moved for a mistrial, arguing that  Waters’ comments, made this weekend, amounted to threats and intimidation. Cahill rejected the motion.
  • Republican politicians quickly condemned Waters and claimed she was inciting violence, including House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Ca.), who proposed a measure to censure her.
  • Democrats defended the Congresswoman, arguing she was not encouraging unrest and accused McCarthy of hypocrisy. Others slammed Cahill, arguing he was undermining free speech and pointing to incidents where similar remarks were not considered grounds to appeal a case.

Judge Cahill Admonishes Rep. Waters

The judge overseeing the trial against Derek Chauvin, the former Minneapolis police officer accused of murdering George Floyd, said Monday that comments made by Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Ca.) over the weekend could be grounds for the entire case to be appealed.

While speaking in Minneapolis on Saturday, Waters said that protesters should “stay on the street” and “get more confrontational” if Chauvin is acquitted.

Following closing arguments Monday afternoon, Chauvin’s lawyer, Eric Nelson, asked for a mistrial, arguing that the Congresswomen’s remarks amounted to threats and intimidation against the jury.

Judge Peter Cahill, who ended every day of testimony by telling jurors “have a good night and don’t watch the news,” dismissed the request, arguing that he believed her remarks would not prejudice the jury, but adding a key caveat.

“I’ll give you that Congresswoman Waters may have given you something on appeal that may result in this whole trial being overturned,” he said. “I wish elected officials would stop talking about this case, especially in a manner that is disrespectful to the rule of law and to the judicial branch and our function.”

Response & Backlash

Immediately, numerous Republicans seized on Cahill’s comments, condemning Waters and accusing her of inciting violence.

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Ca.), announced on Twitter that he was introducing a resolution to censure Waters.

Many also defended Waters, claiming she was not inciting violence. That includes House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Ca.) who said her colleague was talking “about confrontation in the manner of the civil rights movement.” 

Others who took to Twitter echoed that, arguing that McCarthy was being a hypocrite because he himself spread false election claims promoted by former President Donald Trump. Those claims would later incite the Jan. 6 insurrection.

Some additionally accused the minority leader of censuring a Black woman for speaking out against violence in her community but refusing to take any action against members of his party. Many specifically flagged Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fl.), who is being investigated for sex trafficking a minor, and Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, who previously posted racist and antisemitic comments on social media and liked posts calling for Pelosi to be assassinated.

Others took direct aim at Judge Cahill, arguing that he was undermining Waters’ right to free speech and that he was the one who warned the jury not to pay attention to the news but did not sequester them from the get-go.

That point was bolstered by some who pointed out previous incidents where similar remarks were not considered grounds to appeal a case.

“If a statement from Maxine Waters can be used as justification to overturn a guilty verdict for Derek Chauvin on appeal, then courts are gonna have to go back and revisit every single case where Donald Trump made a comment about pending trials for 4 years when he was in office,” CNN commentator Keith Boykin wrote.

See what others are saying: (The New York Times) (The Washington Post) (CNN)

Continue Reading