Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/9110

Bill Overview

Title: Student Borrower Bankruptcy Relief Act of 2022

Description: This bill allows student loans to be discharged in bankruptcy. Under current law, these loans are only dischargeable if such debt imposes an undue hardship on the debtor.

Sponsors: Rep. Nadler, Jerrold [D-NY-10]

Target Audience

Population: Individuals with student loans that could be affected by changes to bankruptcy discharge laws

Estimated Size: 43500000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Freelance Graphic Designer (Seattle, WA)

Age: 28 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 3

Duration of Impact: 20.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I believe allowing student loans to be discharged in bankruptcy would offer immense relief for people like me who tried to make payments but faced unforeseen financial difficulties.
  • This would have been a significant help during the peak of financial stress but could still aid in rebuilding my financial stability.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 3
Year 2 6 4
Year 3 7 4
Year 5 8 5
Year 10 9 6
Year 20 9 6

High School Teacher (Detroit, MI)

Age: 35 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 4

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This act could finally give me the breathing room I need to manage my other debts and start saving.
  • It’s a tough time to be in public service with these financial burdens.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 4
Year 2 6 4
Year 3 6 5
Year 5 7 5
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 8 6

Retail Worker (Austin, TX)

Age: 24 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 4

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • With this policy, I might consider bankruptcy which was never on the table before because of the student loans.
  • I hope it doesn’t come to that, but it’s good to know there would be an option that relieves that burden.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 4
Year 2 5 5
Year 3 6 5
Year 5 6 5
Year 10 6 6
Year 20 7 6

Software Developer (Chicago, IL)

Age: 42 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • While I’m managing, the option is reassuring especially if things get tougher.
  • This policy may indirectly help by possibly encouraging lenders to offer better terms knowing options for discharge are easier.

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 7 7
Year 10 7 7
Year 20 8 8

Administrative Assistant (Brooklyn, NY)

Age: 56 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 3

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Discharging these loans in bankruptcy could really save me as I approach retirement.
  • It’s been a constant worry, not being able to help my children while managing own debts.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 5 3
Year 2 6 3
Year 3 7 4
Year 5 7 4
Year 10 8 5
Year 20 8 6

Environmental Scientist (Boulder, CO)

Age: 40 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 15/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • While it doesn’t change my situation directly, it may help shift national policy discourse on student debt relief.
  • I’m grateful I’ve been able to manage, but I’d welcome changes that help others less fortunate.

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 8 8
Year 20 8 8

Barista (Boston, MA)

Age: 29 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 4

Duration of Impact: 15.0 years

Commonness: 9/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This act is a beacon of hope amidst financial struggles, potentially opening up pathways to reset my financial life.
  • Restarting without student loans would make all the difference.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 4
Year 2 6 4
Year 3 7 5
Year 5 8 5
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 8 6

Nurse (Phoenix, AZ)

Age: 50 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 11/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • If enacted, it could significantly reduce stress and improve life quality for those of us with limited working years ahead.
  • I've made consistent payments but the financial issues add to health worries.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 5
Year 2 7 5
Year 3 7 6
Year 5 8 6
Year 10 8 7
Year 20 9 7

Retired Military (Orlando, FL)

Age: 60 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 13/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy is beneficial but at this point, my retirement fund projections show I’ll be able to manage.
  • It’s crucial for younger families trying to establish stability, though.

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 6 6
Year 10 7 7
Year 20 7 7

Entrepreneur (San Francisco, CA)

Age: 33 | Gender: other

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 8.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • It’s imperative for folks like me who are grinding to get small businesses off the ground and dealing with the weight of student debt.
  • Bankruptcy would be more viable with this policy and a potential fresh start.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 5
Year 2 6 5
Year 3 7 6
Year 5 7 6
Year 10 8 7
Year 20 8 7

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $1000000000 (Low: $800000000, High: $1200000000)

Year 2: $1050000000 (Low: $850000000, High: $1250000000)

Year 3: $1100000000 (Low: $900000000, High: $1300000000)

Year 5: $1200000000 (Low: $1000000000, High: $1400000000)

Year 10: $1500000000 (Low: $1300000000, High: $1700000000)

Year 100: $3000000000 (Low: $2700000000, High: $3300000000)

Key Considerations