Bill Overview
Title: Federal Employee Student Debt Transparency Act
Description: This bill requires (1) Senior Executive Service and Schedule C federal employees to annually disclose any federal student loan debt, and (2) the Office of Government Ethics to annually report the total amount owed by such employees and any employees who failed to comply with the bill's requirements.
Sponsors: Rep. Budd, Ted [R-NC-13]
Target Audience
Population: Senior Executive Service and Schedule C federal employees with student debt
Estimated Size: 8000
- Senior Executive Service (SES) employees are a small percentage of the federal workforce, composed of top-level executives.
- Schedule C employees are also a specific, albeit smaller, group characterized as non-career political appointees.
- There are around 2 million civilian federal employees, but the SES population is much smaller, estimated to be around 8,000 individuals.
- The government's 2021 report showed about 4.45 million federal student loan borrowers.
- Federal employees make up a small portion of total student loan borrowers.
- SES and Schedule C employees likely represent a minor subset of federal employees with student debt.
Reasoning
- The SES and Schedule C employees are a small subset of the federal workforce, so the direct impact of the Federal Employee Student Debt Transparency Act will also be limited to this subgroup.
- Since the SES comprises about 8,000 employees, not all will have federal student loans; hence the policy impacts those with loans in terms of transparency requirements.
- The budgetary constraints of $500,000 in the first year and $5 million over 10 years limit the scope and full implementation ability of the policy.
- There might be indirect effects such as increased awareness or ethical considerations across other federal employees.
- Individuals outside the specific target group within the general population are unlikely to experience direct impacts but may perceive it as an accountability measure for government transparency.
Simulated Interviews
Senior Executive Service Member (Washington D.C.)
Age: 54 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think this policy is a good step towards transparency; however, I'm concerned about privacy.
- Disclosing my student debt isn't a big issue for me personally, but others might feel differently.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Schedule C Employee (New York, NY)
Age: 39 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is helpful in promoting accountability.
- However, I worry about being stigmatized for having student debt.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 5 |
Corporate Lawyer (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 46 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Though the policy may promote transparency, it doesn't affect my life.
- I'm more interested in broader reforms that offer debt relief.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Senior IT Executive (Austin, TX)
Age: 42 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This transparency policy seems like a minor administrative task for me.
- It sensitizes us to our financial responsibilities, which I support.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Federal Research Scientist (Chicago, IL)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I appreciate transparency overall, but my role is not directly affected.
- It's good that such measures are being taken; hopefully, they'll be expanded.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Academic Dean (Boston, MA)
Age: 48 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The initiative for transparency in the government is encouraging.
- Doesn't affect me now, but I support holding people accountable.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Engineer and Schedule C Appointee (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Knowing everyone has to be transparent, including myself, makes it fair.
- I'm content with having this requirement given my job title.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Senior Analyst in Federal Government (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 33 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 1/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm a bit anxious about the first release of this data.
- I hope it leads to broader support for people managing student debt.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 3 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 2 | 5 |
Retired SES Member (Houston, TX)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy is fine, adding a layer of accountability.
- Because it doesn't affect real benefits, I don't see much change in outcomes.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Non-profit Manager (Seattle, WA)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I view this policy positively for promoting government accountability.
- It doesn't directly impact me, but it's good public policy.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $500000 (Low: $250000, High: $750000)
Year 2: $500000 (Low: $250000, High: $750000)
Year 3: $500000 (Low: $250000, High: $750000)
Year 5: $500000 (Low: $250000, High: $750000)
Year 10: $500000 (Low: $250000, High: $750000)
Year 100: $500000 (Low: $250000, High: $750000)
Key Considerations
- The cost primarily involves compiling, reviewing, and reporting loan disclosure information for a limited number of federal employees.
- Impact on federal budgeting is minimal compared to larger scale federal programs.
- Compliance and administrative costs may be reduced if electronic systems effectively streamline the reporting process.