Obamacare Throws Lifeline to Young Adults Seeking Health Insurance

June 7, 2013 in The Daily Beast

by Dan Mizrachi

In better times, 26-year-olds staying on their parents’ health-insurance plans may have seemed strange. Now children are relying on their parents’ coverage well into their mid-20s, and the use of this crutch is a symptom of the shaky employment landscape for young adults.

Obamacare’s dependent-coverage provision, which allows young adults to stay on their parents’ plans until December 31 of the year in which they turn 26, was supposed to be a second option, a fallback plan for early-career turbulence. But the real unemployment rate of people ages 18–29 hovers at 16.3 percent, and a tight labor market has forced many young adults to hang onto their parents’ coverage until the last legal moment.

Since March 2010 the Affordable Care Act has afforded 3.1 million young adults access to insurance they would not otherwise have. This change is a vast improvement from the pre-Obamacare days when age 19—older for full-time students—was the cutoff at which insurance companies forced children from their parents’ plans.

The figure 3.1 million is a big number, and in a better economy, it would be smaller. According to a 2011 report by the groups Demos and Young Invincibles, “Just 43.7 percent of all 18- to 24-year-olds and 55.7 percent of 25- to 34-year-olds were covered by an employer sponsored plan in 2009, both significantly lower than a decade earlier.” For anyone underemployed and under 26, Obamacare covers a major shortfall.

There’s another issue: a 26th birthday doesn’t guarantee a job with health benefits. Once they turn 26, individuals have no option but to purchase insurance on their own. Obamacare will approach its final form on October 1, when individuals will be able to purchase insurance through online exchanges, and the government will offer tax credits and subsidies based on the income levels of customers. But the exchanges aren’t quite ready, and the employment outlook for young adults remains bleak.

Aaron Steely, 27, who talks health care as he finishes up his cashier shift at a café in Washington, D.C., has endured the ups and downs of finding health insurance in a stagnant job market. In November 2008, six months after he graduated from college, Steely had to leave his parents’ plan. When he needed it most, he had no coverage. “I went without health insurance for a while and I broke my toe,” says Steely. “Did not go to the doctor because of the ridiculously expensive X-rays and stuff. Then I tried to heal it myself and rebroke it again three months later.”

By March 2010, when the dependent-coverage provision kicked in, Steely still didn’t have a job with benefits. “I went back on my [parents’ insurance] and it was definitely a relief,” says Steely. “I got seen for a bunch of stuff.”

Jen Mishory, deputy director of Young Invincibles, feels that the timing of the dependent-coverage provision was especially effective, given the state of the economy in 2010. “The extension came at a time that it was particularly needed because young people were hit particularly hard by the recession,” says Mishory.

Things started looking up for Steely soon after his 26th birthday in October 2011. By December, he found a full-time job—with benefits —as a geospatial analyst for a defense contractor. A year later, however, with the sequester looming, Steely’s employer hedged its bets with layoffs, and Steely was among the casualties.

Over the past six months he has racked up three part-time jobs, none of which offers health benefits. Steely adds that purchasing coverage is “not worth it when you can Google something and just read everything about it.”

John Browning, who waits tables at a local restaurant, was dropped from his parents’ plan after he turned 26 last November. He graduated from the University of Wisconsin, Madison four years ago. His approach to health insurance is more cautious than Steely’s. Since January, Browning has paid just over $100 a month for a catastrophic plan, so “if I get hit by a bus or something I can not go broke the rest of my life.”

Options for the likes of Steely and Browning are set to improve in the fall. “Beginning in October, all Americans will be able to buy quality, affordable insurance in the health-insurance marketplace, and many young adults will qualify for tax credits to help cover the cost,” said a spokeswoman for the Department of Health and Human Services via email. However, the administration’s struggles to spread the good news are well documented.

As Sarah Kliff noted in The Washington Post last November, “seventy-eight percent of the uninsured Americans who are likely to qualify for subsidies were unfamiliar with the new coverage options in a survey by Democratic polling firm Lake Research Partners. That survey, sponsored by the nonprofit Enroll America, also found that 83 percent of those likely to qualify for the expansion of Medicaid, which is expected to cover 12 million Americans, were unaware of the option.” Additionally, an April reportfrom the Kaiser Family Foundation found that four in 10 Americans didn’t know whether Obamacare was still law.

In spite of the administration’s best intentions to prepare those without coverage for the opening of the exchanges, the late-20s crowd seems just as confused about buying insurance under Obamacare as the rest of the country. Kavita Patel, a health policy expert at the Brookings Institution, worries that young adults don’t know how the law will affect their lives. “People forget that 26-year-olds have health problems, too,” she says. “The big [issue] right now [is] awareness because [young adults] don’t know they have an option come October 1.”

And while the exchanges will make health care more affordable, purchasing insurance won’t help young adults find jobs, either before or after they turn 26. Both Steely and Browning want better coverage but can’t afford it right now. Obamacare seeks to remedy some of their problems: in October, the government will provide premium subsidies to anyone making less than $45,960.

Steely didn’t know that Obamacare might help him out in the event of another broken bone. “Honestly, I haven’t looked into anything recently.” Browning feels similarly: “I have no idea how that stuff works.”

New Unemployment Rate: Millennial Joblessness Jumps to 11.6%, and That’s Bad News If You’re Looking For Work

June 7, 2013 in Policy Mic

by Rory O’Sullivan

Last month, the economy added 175,000 jobs while the national unemployment rate ticked up to 7.6% from 7.5% last month. For millennials ages 18 to 29, the unemployment rate rose from 11.1% in April 2013 to 11.6% in May 2013 (not seasonally adjusted), according to Generation Opportunity, wiping out the previous month’s gains. For younger workers ages 16 to 24, the unemployment rate rose .2 percentage points to 16.3% (seasonally adjusted).

This is bad news heading into June. Summer is a time when many younger adults get their first jobs. Early work experience is vital not just for earning a little spending money, but also for building a successful career down the road. Moreover, the country as a whole benefits from higher individual wages because it means more taxes paid and less reliance on public benefits.

However, the dismal youth job market continues to deny our generation essential opportunities – and teens are among the hardest hit. Since the start of the recession in 2008, teen unemployment has remained well over 20%, and it’s not looking good going into summer this year. Right now, 16 to 19 year olds face a 24.1% unemployment rate. Worse still, this figure only takes into account teens who are looking for jobs, ignoring discouraged teens who have stopped looking for work entirely. The true teen jobless rate is much higher. Rampant teen unemployment threatens serious long-term consequences for the future of the country.

The Economic Policy Institute recently took a look at how teen unemployment affects communities across the country. See how your state stacks up by visiting their interactive map.

If you want to do something about the problem, come join us at Young Invincibles. We’re working with job training programs across the country to educate people about the ongoing youth employment crisis and the solutions available to solve it.

DC Students and Colleges Share Their Thoughts on the Student Loan Interest Rates Controversy

June 6, 2013 in In the Capital

by Molly Greenberg

Now that you know what the student loan debate is all about (if not, you should readthis), it’s time to hear from some of the lesser heard voices who are apt to be greatly impacted by whatever decision is to be made about the interest rates on subsidized Stafford Loans. I’m talking about the students and colleges, two of the biggest components of the education system who are equally if not more frustrated with Congress than President Obama. Check out what a couple of D.C. students and colleges across America have to say about the student loan interest rate situation below:

How D.C. Students Feel

On Wednesday, June 5, the President and Vice President of the Georgetown University Student Association wrote an op-ed in The Hoya titled “Take Action Against Rising Student Loan Interest Rates.” The duo, Nate Tisa and Adam Ramdan, wrote about how students need to speak up and make their voice heard during such an important time in education history.

“The idea that future generations — and even our own peers — will be denied this opportunity because they lack the resources is disheartening. To accept that some Americans are unable to pursue the education they thirst for and need is to defer the American dream,” they said. “As representatives of the student body, GUSA has a responsibility to empower students and make our voices heard by those in government who may be tempted to give up on the aspirations of millions of young people. We have therefore begun a campaign to push Congressional leaders to get a bill on the president’s desk before the July 1 deadline and to address student debt in the long term.”

Calling for a “deficit-neutral” bill that would freeze interest rates yet again until 2015, Tisa and Ramdan explained their three-prong plan to tackle the student debt problem in the long term:

First, reach out to student governments from across the U.S. and asked them to sign their name to a letter meant for Congress proposing their new legislation. Citing the triumph of a past GUSA President and Vice President with their “Do We Have a Deal Yet?” campaign requesting Congress to raise the debt ceiling, Tisa and Ramdan believe they too can find “success in numbers.”

Second, send petition around the university that is supported by College Republicans and College Democrats alike, proving that if Georgetown can find a bipartisan solution to the student loan dilemma, so too can Congress.

Third, encourage students to contact their representatives in Congress. “We have the political power to help persuade Congress to pass a bipartisan deal. Regardless of whether this issue affects you personally, many of your fellow students’ futures depend on the outcome of this legislation,” they wrote.

“The most important part of a Georgetown education is the development of a social conscience — a sense of duty to others. We have a responsibility to use our education and experiences on the Hilltop to work toward a world where that privilege is accessible to all. Take a few minutes to give back by reminding members of Congress that the American dream they once achieved is still alive and well in the hands of future generations.”

While this is only a small segment of the student population, what these two Georgetown students have to say really resonates with other Millennials I’ve spoken with.

How Colleges Feel

There has been an outpouring of support from colleges for Senator Warren’s “Bank on Students Loan Fairness Act.” Babson College; Bentley University; Brandeis University; Boston College; Dean College; Emerson College; Emmanuel College; Hampshire College; Lasell College; Marian Court College; MIT; New England Conservatory; Nichols College; Northeastern University; Simmons College; Wheaton College; Wheelock College; Williams College’ Worcester Polytechnic Institute; are just the Massachusetts colleges and universities who have endorsed Warren’s plan moving forward. Organizations including the American Federation of Teachers, Association of Independent Colleges and Universities in Massachusetts; Campaign for America’s Future; Credo; Democracy for America; Move On; National Organization for Women; National Youth Association; Progressive Change Campaign Committee; Rebuild the Dream; Student Debt Crisis; United States Student Association; and Young Invincibles are also behind Warren’s legislation.

Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) has made her stance on student loans well-known as well with the S. 897: Bank on Student Loan Fairness Act. Warren, who has received a tremendous amount of support from colleges across the country, announced her plans on May 8 to set student loan interest rates at the same level as big banks receive from the Federal Reserve. She’s pushing for legislation that reduces the rate to 0.75 percent.

Many collegiate organizations have also banded together to write a letter to Representatives John Kline and Virginia Foxx, conveying their views about H.R. 1911: Smarter Solutions for Students Act. The Republican duo’s proposal to peg interest rates to 10-year Treasury notes would stop the rates from doubling. While the rates would stay fairly low for now, they would inevitably climb as the economy improves. The American Association of Community Colleges; American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers; American Association of State Colleges and Universities; American Council on Education; American Indian Higher Education Consortium; Association of American Universities; Association of Jesuit Colleges and Universities; Association of Public and Land-grant Universities; Council for Christian Colleges & Universities; Council of Graduate Schools; Hispanic Association of Colleges and Universities; National Association for Equal Opportunity in Higher Education; National Association of College and University Business Officers; National Association of Independent Colleges and Universities; and National Association of Student Financial Aid Administrators all signed the letter.

“First and foremost, the federal student loan programs were created to enable students to access postsecondary education,” they said. “Any changes must reflect this purpose, and should be aimed at ensuring that deserving students, regardless of means, can afford to attend college. This is the core reason for these programs’ existence, and attempts to weaken this purpose would represent a historic and damaging alteration to them.”

They made sure to mention that:

  • Federal student loans should be at the lowest possible cost to students.
  • Short-term fixes should not detract from creating long-term solutions.
  • Students shouldn’t have to give up long-term benefits in order to receive short-term gains.
  • Alterations made to aid programs or other existing benefits can be made as long as the changes are meant to help student loan borrowers. Getting rid of benefits for some and helping out other students with more aid is not a fix, it “shifts the burden.”
  • Student loan interest rates should be tied to market rates.
And here’s what they’re opposed to:
  • Eliminating or decreasing today’s in-school interest subsidy without more support for other components of student financial aid.
  • They also don’t support any policies that would “offset costs by increasing student loan origination fees” for they would make the burden of borrowing even worse for students.

Now the question is: How do you feel? Share your thoughts on the student loan rates controversy in the comment section below.

Offer Low-Interest Loans to Students

June 6, 2013 in Tri States Public Radio

by Bill Knight

In the last year progressives such as Independent U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders from Vermont and Tea Party-endorsed U.S. Sen. Rand Paul from Kentucky have blasted the Federal Reserve, the United States’ central banking system. If Tea Party and progressive types are truly independent and populist, they should support the new bill by Massachusetts’ Democratic U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren that would ensure that college students get equal treatment under the law for borrowing and make the Federal Reserve contribute to society, not just the rich and powerful.

The student debt is a crisis. Borrowers owe about $1 trillion in student loans, and this month’s grads face a bleak job market with an average debt of $26,000, mostly at 3.4% interest. Meanwhile, Wall Street can borrow from the Federal Reserve’s “Discount Window” for 0.75%.

According to a survey conducted by the Young Invincibles advocacy group and released by the organization Student Debt Crisis, about 15% of student borrowers said they’d been denied a mortgage because of their debt; 28% had taken on credit-card debt to continue their with loan payments; 46% dropped services like cable or Internet; and 35% borrowed from friends or family to keep up.

Why should students be crushed beneath the heels of big banks that not only profit from loaning money to students, but are the sector that caused the financial crisis with crazy, complex speculation? Because they can be victimized by those with more influence – just as rural residents, farmers, minorities and other slices of the nation have been for decades.

To prevent the doubling of the need-based Stafford Direct Loan interest rate from 3.4% to 6.8% (now scheduled to change July 1), Warren’s bill – S. 897 – would [quote] “ensure that such loans are available at interest rates that are equivalent to the interest rates at which the Federal government provides loans to banks through the discount window operated by the Federal Reserve System.”

Introduced and assigned to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions on May 8, Warren’s proposal has just six Senate co-sponsors and it’s targeted for filibuster by the GOP or for defeat by Democrats who support Sens. Harry Reed and Tom Harkin’s stop-gap measure, S. 953, which freezes the interest rate at 3.4%. Matthew M. Chingos and Beth Akers of the sometimes-liberal Brookings Institution criticized the bill, saying, “Warren’s proposal should be quickly dismissed as a cheap political gimmick. It proposes only a one-year change to the rate on one kind of federal student loan … and does not reflect the administrative costs and default risk that increase the costs of the federal student loan program.”

But Warren – who adds that the government makes 36 cents for each $1 it lends to students ($34 billion this year) – scoffs, saying, “Some argue that it’s too expensive to keep government loans at low interest rates, but the federal government makes low-interest loans all the time – just not to everyone. The biggest banks in the country – the ones that wrecked our economy and cost millions of Americans their jobs – pay next to nothing on their debt. Students pay nine times as much.”

Supporters argue that it would force the Federal Reserve – which prints its resources, as libertarian-leaning conservatives have pointed out – to make the loans instead of using taxes that citizens pay.

A statement from United Front Against Austerity, an independent, international coalition to fight austerity policies, says, “It is vital to point out that Warren’s bill will not cost the U.S. Treasury or U.S. taxpayers one penny. It represents federal lending, not federal spending. It simply mandates the use of credit-creating power which the Fed has always had but has insisted using for the benefit of financial institutions only. The bill would relieve pressure on the federal budget by freeing up general revenue for other uses.”

Yes, it’d still be a LOAN, not a grant. It’s hardly radical; not like free higher education in some countries.

In addition to at least helping college students this year, it exposes the inequality in banking and the privileges of the powerful, whether Big Banks or the Fed itself.

Warren argues, “Students actually spend their loan money on surviving as consumers in a tight economy, while learning skills needed for the economy of the future. On the other hand, the already too-big-to-fail banks have used the government’s free money to become even more obscenely powerful.”

Will young adults want Obamacare? Let’s ask a young person who’d know.

June 6, 2013 in Washington Post

by Ezra Klein

There’s been an interesting conversation over the last week about how young people will fare under health reform. Aaron Smith, executive director of Young Invincibles (and a bona fide young adult) has spent the past few years of his life worrying and working on exactly that question. So I asked him to weigh in. A lightly edited transcript of our conversation follows.

Ezra Klein: What have you guys learned about how young adults think about health insurance, both in the current system and in terms of Obamacare?Aaron Smith: I’d begin with the economic landscape because I think that matters here. The young adults we’re talking about are largely low income. They might be in school or in school part-time or in community college. They’re in and out of the workforce. They’re having a tough time landing a steady job with benefits. They don’t make very much money. Many of them were on their parents’ plan growing up. They don’t have a ton of familiarity with the health system. They don’t always know what terms like “deductible” and “co-pay” mean.

But they know they can get sick. More young people than folks over 75 go to the emergency room in a year. It happens frequently enough to them and their friends that they know the costs can be astronomical. Young women are more frequent users of health care; they need things like birth control and regular check-ups. You have young men who don’t have a primary doctor or even remember the last time they went to the doctor. About 15 percent of young adults have a chronic condition and know pretty well that they need health care.

How many of them are uninsured now?

About 19 million young adults 18 to 34 lack health insurance. Our polling shows that less than 5 percent of young people choose not to have it. The number one reason they don’t have it is the cost. Most young people don’t qualify for Medicaid right now even if they have very low incomes because most states just don’t give childless adults Medicaid. That’s one of the biggest changes under Obamacare. If every state expanded Medicaid, about 8 million would qualify for Medicaid. Another 9 million would qualify for subsidies because they make less than 400 percent of poverty.

So then 17 of the 19 million uninsured young people are, in theory, eligible for either subsidies or Medicaid under Obamacare?

That’s right. It’s a pretty phenomenal percentage. So if we do our jobs right, young people will be one of the biggest winners in the health-care law.

But behind this conversation lurks this larger question of whether young people care about health insurance at all. There’s a school of thought that says a lot of the young people who are uninsured or have very little insurance just don’t think they need health insurance. But, and this is anecdotal, that doesn’t fit with my experience very well. Young people I know are really nervous when they don’t have health insurance. They’re really excited if they get a job with benefits. I’m not saying I’ve got a perfectly representative sample, but I’m just not meeting many of these kids who literally don’t care about being insured. 

I heard this story on the radio the other day about a young person who said, “I didn’t really feel like I was an adult until I got a job with health insurance.” That’s definitely something I can relate to and that I’ve seen out there in the field. The term “young invincibles” is a health insurance industry term. It tries to explain the fact that young people are disproportionately uninsured. But I think people just dramatically underestimate how hard it is for someone who don’t get health insurance at their job to get health insurance. Less than 50 percent of young adults get employer-sponsored health insurance.

There have been some studies that looked at the choice of whether to accept coverage when you had an employer-based offer. Young people and older people made pretty much the same decisions. Older people were a bit higher, but both were above 70 percent. So when they have the option, the vast majority take it. But when you don’t have the option you have to make tough choices. It’s like deciding not to have a car or living in a bad area. It’s just a tough choice.

 But the cost does matter. So is Obamacare actually going to make insurance affordable for this group? Or will it make insurance more expensive for young, healthy people by making it easier for sicker, older people to buy insurance without getting discriminated against? 

The first important point is the huge percentage of unemployed young people who get access to either subsidies or Medicaid. So you saw in California that many young people will end up having insurance options that cost them less than $100 or less than $50 simply because their income is low enough to qualify for subsidies. For someone making $20,000 a year, they’re going to have to pay $40 a month for health insurance. That’s a very good deal. And in a state like California, there are also millions of young people who qualify for Medicaid.

Now we’ve identified a population between 300 percent and 400 percent of the federal poverty level that’s going to have more problems. The subsidies aren’t that rich for them, and so whether to buy is a tougher question. They’ll have financial strain. They have financial strain now. That’s why they’re uninsured. If you’re just getting by, then $200 a month can be a lot. That’s where education can be key. It can still make good financial sense to be covered because there are real risks. But I think, in general, it will be a good enough deal to sign up. We saw that in Massachusetts where youth uninsurance dropped in half in the first year.

 Expand on that a bit. I recognize Massachusetts is a somewhat unusual state. But its health reforms were very similar to the national reforms. They should’ve had the same issues with rate shock and with bringing older and sicker people in. So what did we learn from them?

There were a couple of interesting things in Massachusetts. One is the Massachusetts exchange had what’s called the “young adult” plan. It’s higher deductibles. It’s a bit cheaper in terms of premiums. It’s similar in some ways to the catastrophic plan available under the health-care law. It’s the most popular plan for young adults in the exchange. So that’s one important point: Youth-tailored insurance options are important.

And just to be clear, the federal plan has something similar in this catastrophic plan mainly available to young people, right? 

Yes, so there’s a catastrophic plan as part of the health law. There’s not been that much analysis of it. But it’s specifically targeting that young adult population. It has a very high deductible — about $6,000. So it’s not generous coverage. But it meets all the other standards in terms of benefit caps and preventive coverage and no discrimination and so on. For many young people, that will be their cheapest option. Particularly above that 300 percent of poverty line. In California, that was costing about $130 to $150 a month.

What else did we see in Massachusetts? 

They also did big public outreach campaigns. They got the Boston Red Sox to do PSAs. They understood there had to be an attitude change and they were very proactive about trying to address it. The polls show health reform in Massachusetts is actually quite popular, even among young people who are now being forced to purchase coverage. And that’s another similarity. There’s a mandate. But it has exceptions. Not many people pay it in Massachusetts. If you’re low-income, it doesn’t apply to you. That’s true nationally, too. The mandate doesn’t apply to you if coverage is more than 8 percent of your income. What we saw in Massachusetts is that people are either exempt or they choose to pay for health insurance, Very few end up paying the mandate.

The last point which has been talked about so much people don’t think about it anymore is the expansion of dependent coverage which has also been very popular. Nationally about three million people are estimated to have gotten back on their parents plan because of the law.

 So given all the issues of implementation and the political opposition to the law and the difficulties in various states and the early information about premiums, where do you think this will end up in 2014 and 2015? Do you think young people will sign up or stay away?

I’m pretty hopeful, in part because the experience in Massachusetts showed this model can work. But it will play out differently in different states. A state like California is following the playbook. They’ll do a big promotional campaign. They’re investing in on-the-ground outreach and education. They’re expanding Medicaid so really low-income folks will qualify for health insurance. So I could see it being a huge success in a state like that. But not every state will do that. An important point for young people is that some of the states with the highest rates of youth uninsurance are in the south and some of those states aren’t expanding Medicaid or building their own exchanges. My fear is what happens in those states. So I could see some states coming out and looking much better than other states.

$1 Trillion Debt Crushes Business Dreams of U.S. Students

June 5, 2013 in Bloomberg News. Cross-posted in Businessweek on  June 6, 2013; the Portland PressHerald on June 6, 2013; Inforum on June 6, 2013; and Money News on June 6, 2013.

by Meera Lewis

Dr. Steve Sherick wants to build the emergency-care business he started two years ago that now employs seven doctors and two part-time administrators. The $300,000 in student loans he and his wife carry makes that prospect difficult, he said.

Sherick, 36, who contracts with a local hospital in Trinidad,Colorado, about 200 miles south of Denver, graduated in 2009 with about $140,000 of debt. That’s not counting the student loans of his wife, a pediatric oncologist, and their mortgage. He would like to hire a full-time administrator and offer more competitive salaries to entice doctors to work in the rural community.

“It deters an entrepreneurial spirit when you already start four steps behind the starting line,” said Sherick. “The student debt increases the risk for an entrepreneur like me and makes it harder to expand new business, get loans and thus hire new people.”

Former students hobbled by a collective $1 trillion in education loans can be hindered in expanding or forming small businesses and creating jobs for themselves and others. While self-employment among those 65 years old and over increased24 percent in 2010 from 2005, it fell 19 percent among individuals 25 and under in the same period, according to the Small Business Administration.

“The burden of student debt probably places pretty big constraints on your viable options after graduation,” said Dane Stangler, director of research and policy at Kansas City-based Kauffman Foundation, which focuses on supporting entrepreneurship. “With more student debt and stricter bank lending, it really hinders the ability of students to take risks, start a company.”

43 Percent

The share of 25-year-olds with student debt increased to 43 percent last year from 25 percent in 2003. The average education-loan balance among that age group grew by 91 percent over the period, to $20,326 from $10,649, according to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. Those balances, which now exceed credit-card debt, are impeding young adults under age 30 from buying homes and cars, according to an April blog post on the bank’s website.

Student debt can also suppress risk-taking and innovation by discouraging the formation of new businesses, the federal government’s Consumer Financial Protection Bureau said in a reportreleased May 8, which attracted over 28,000 comments.

“For many young entrepreneurs, it is critical to invest capital to develop ideas, market products, and hire employees,” the CFPB said in its report. “Student debt burdens require these individuals to divert cash away from their businesses so they can make monthly student loan payments.”

Monthly Payments

Almost 23 percent of 9,500 respondents stated they had put off starting a business because of monthly student debt payments owed to private lenders, according to a 2013 survey by the Young Invincibles, a nonprofit youth advocacy organization, referenced in the CFPB report. Eight percent of those with private student debt stated that they were unable to start a business because they were denied a loan, survey respondents said.

Those with debt financed by private lenders said they had less flexibility to enroll in repayment plans to allow them to better manage cash flow than those with federal student loans, according to Jen Mishory, deputy director of Young Invincibles. For government-backed loans, students can often work out more affordable options such as payments with caps based on income and family size.

$180,000 Debt

Katie VanDyk, who graduated from Tulane University Law School in New Orleans last year, said her student loans of about $180,000 put going into business full time on the back burner. “You can’t look at the big number every day, you just chip away at it,” said VanDyk, who now works as a lawyer in Austin, Texas. “It is intimidating because it is going to be about 20 years before I pay it off.”

VanDyk, 26, started an online business in 2011 for sorority recruitment with her brother Wes VanDyk, who has about $38,000 in student debt.

“It’s a big burden and if there was a way to mitigate that it would free up the potential to do things and take more risks,” said Wes VanDyk, 23, who graduated from the University of Georgia in business management last year and continues to operate the company, which his sister is involved with part-time. My debt “weighed on my conscience as I was deciding to move forward with the business.”

About 15 percent of outstanding education loans consists of private debt, and a combination of private initiatives and public policy could help ease this burden, the CFPB has said. There were more than $8 billion in defaulted private student loan balances at the end of 2011, with more in delinquency, according to the CFPB.

Severe Consequences

“The consequences of not meeting those loan obligations are very severe,” said Rohit Chopra, the CFPB’s student-loan ombudsman. “Once they become late, or delinquent or in default, that makes it more challenging for them to access personal credit in order to build their businesses.”

Interest on some new federal loans is set to double to 6.8 percent July 1 if Congress doesn’t extend the current rate. An election-year deal last year froze rates at 3.4 percent for one year on subsidized Stafford loans, which are available to low-income students. President Barack Obama on May 31 urged Congress to pass his legislation to prevent the increase when that measure expires.

No Forgiveness

While a bankruptcy can wipe out housing and credit-card debt, there’s no forgiveness on student loans. Since a 2005 change in bankruptcy laws, student debt can’t be discharged, barring reasons such as severe and permanent disability. Lenders can garnish income-tax refunds, wages, and even Social Security checks to get repayment.

Student debt may have another effect on small business by influencing graduates’ job choices, the Main Street Alliance, an organization with some 1,200 small business owners in the U.S, wrote in a comment letter to the CFPB in April. Small business, defined as an independent operation having fewer than 500 employees, created 66.1 percent of net new jobs from the third quarter of 2009 through the third quarter of 2012, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

“Student debt burdens may cause valued employees to leave the ‘family’ atmosphere of a small business by seeking opportunities with larger businesses with more lucrative benefits,” the group wrote.

More Money

Sherick says he experiences an aspect of that effect in trying to expand his business. “Because of student loans, doctors want to cluster around the urban area where they can make more money,” he said. “I have a competing interest when I’m trying to recruit,” Sherick said. “It is hard for me to pay them more.”

Sherick says he tries not to think about the enormity of his loans, which he expects to pay back in 20 years. “At the end of the day, you have to be struck by a fairly insane sense of optimism that things are going to be better tomorrow than they are today,” he said.

Millions of Young Adults Uninsured as Obamacare Looms

June 3, 2013 in Newsmax

by Sandy Fitzgerald

Convincing more than 2 million uninsured Californians between the ages of 19 and 34 — and other young adults nationwide — to enroll in Obamacare may prove a difficult but vital task.

Participation of young adults is considered crucial to balance the older, sicker patients who are likely to sign up for health insurance when Obamacare is fully implemented next year, The Los Angeles Times reports. But convincing them to spend money on insurance while they are healthy is a “marketing challenge,” concedes Larry Levitt, a senior vice president for the Kaiser Family Foundation.

“For kids in their 20s, following convention isn’t their first instinct,” said Levitt.

Federal law allows young adults to remain on their parents’ policies until they are 26 years old, helping some delay signing up for insurance. But millions remain uninsured, and beginning next year they will be required to have insurance or pay a tax penalty of $95 or 1 percent of their household income in the first year of Obamacare.

The fine isn’t steep enough to convince people to sign up, some critics say. But Oscar Hidalgo, a spokesman for Covered California, the state’s health-insurance exchange, says “young people will need to understand the risks of not having health insurance.”

The California exchange is developing advertising to target young adults, telling them insurance will protect their finances if they are hospitalized.

Premiums will vary by age and income. For example, in California, a 21-year-old earning about $16,000 would pay about $45 a month for coverage, but that could rise if more healthy people don’t enroll.

California also is extending grants to colleges to educate students about insurance options. Many likely are for coverage through Medicaid or other subsidized programs.

Tamika Butler, California director of the Young Invincibles — a policy and advocacy organization that focuses on enrollment and education — said her agency is telling young people about the benefits of having insurance, and believes that as younger consumers learn more, they’ll spread the word.

“Young people are a gateway to not just get insured themselves,” she said, “but to get other community members insured.”

Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com http://www.newsmax.com/US/young-adults-obamacare-insurance/2013/06/03/id/507749#ixzz2WDQqiU5X
Urgent: Should Obamacare Be Repealed? Vote Here Now!

Unemployment Among Young Adults Decreasing in Texas, But Ever So Slowly

June 3, 2013 in Dallas Observer

by Brantley Hargrove

The workers bearing the disproportionate brunt of the recession are young, underemployed or unemployed and struggling to gain a foothold at a critical stage in life. In Texas, the overall unemployment rate is 6.8 percent. The number of unemployed, aged 16 to 24, is more than double that, a report finds.

Because these numbers pertain to an entire generation — comprising mostly the oft-reviled Millennials — they should be of concern for every living generation. They are the future, and right now a big chunk of that future is failing to launch.

According to Young Invincibles, a national organization dedicated to expanding work opportunities for young adults, increased college enrollment is only part of this story. More young people are taking part-time work and fewer are finding full-time jobs. Since the precipitous fall in the number of young Texans with full-time jobs in 2007 — some 10 percent in the space of just a few years — the numbers are beginning a very, very modest rebound.

But the group urges caution before we all start high-fiving and proclaiming the great recession at an end. Stocks may be hitting historic highs; home prices may be edging up again; and job creation may just barely be keeping pace with population growth. Yet participation in the workforce of those 55 and older is rising, while it continues to fall among the young.

It may take them years — even a decade — to realize the kinds of wages they would have earned in bumper times. College grads who enter the workforce during an economic downturn, if they find work at all, are often underemployed, and the stain on a career track persists. Yale study found. “The coming years will be pivotal to the economic future of Texas’ young adults,” the group says.

Oddly enough, these Millennials, despite being dealt a terrible hand at the beginning of their professional lives, were found to be optimistic about the future of this country, even as it sank into the depths of economic malaise, Pew research said. And if there’s one thing young folks looking for work in Texas and elsewhere could use right about now, it’s a little hope.

Rally Planned to Fight Higher Interest Rates on College Loans

June 3, 2013 in Education Week

by Caralee Adams

As the political debate heats up over student-loan interest rates, advocacy groups are organizing to voice concern over college affordability on June 5, which has been declared “Student Debt Day 2013.”

A coalition including Campus ProgressRock the VoteUS PIRG, and Young Invincibles and the American Federation of Teachers are rallying members to leverage Congress to keep interest rates on student loans from doubling July 1, a move that groups maintain will cost the average student borrower an additional $1,000 per loan.

Unless lawmakers act by July 1, interest rates on subsidized Stafford loans, available to those demonstrating financial need, will double from 3.4 percent to 6.8 percent. The same scenarioplayed out last summer, and students were able to persuade Congress to keep rates low—but just for one year.

Now some policymakers are looking for a long-term solution, but the parties cannot agree on how that looks.

President Obama made it clear in a Rose Garden event Friday, surrounded by college students, that he didn’t like the approach that House Republicans have proposed. He urged students to write, email, and Tweet their congressional representatives to express their opinion on the issue.

“The test here is simple. We’ve got to make sure that federal student loan rates don’t double on July 1st. The House of Representatives has already passed a student-loan bill, and I’m glad that they took action. But unfortunately, their bill does not meet that test,” said Obama in his remarks Friday. “It fails to lock in low rates for students next year. That’s not smart. It eliminates safeguards for lower-income families. That’s not fair. It could actually cost a freshman starting school this fall more over the next four years than if we did nothing at all and let the interest rates double on July 1st.”

The House bill would tie interest rates on federally subsidized undergraduate student loans to the 10-year U.S. Treasury note, something the Obama administration also proposed in its fiscal year budget. But the House version would allow the rate to fluctuate, and after graduation, students could package their loans together and take the weighted average of the interest rate on their loans. (See Politics K-12.)

The president’s plan outlined in a fact sheet on the White House website could result in interest rates even lower than 3.4 percent initially, but rates would vary from year to year and be locked in over the life of every loan. The administration version would not place a cap on how high the rates could go, which some student groups have criticized.

On Friday, Obama did not specifically tout his plan or the Senate Democratic version of a solution.

Many student-advocacy groups have indicated support for the Senate Democrat’s proposed Student Loan Affordability Act of 2013, which would extend the low 3.4 interest rate for another year and allow Congress to address a longer-term solution in the next reauthorization of the Higher Education Act in 2015.

“We are hearing a lot of frustration from students that we are having to fight this battle again this year,” says Rory O’Sullivan of the Washington-based Young Invincibles. While there is a desire for a long-term solution and tying interest rates to the market is fine, his organization wants a cap included to ensure affordability and predictability for student borrowers. O’Sullivan says none of the proposals meet that criteria. So, the message coming on Wednesday from students to lawmakers is, at a minimum, to keep interest rates low for now, he says.

The issue affects nearly 7 million student borrowers. US PIRG researchers compiled a table of the top 25 college and universities where students borrow using Stafford loans to illustrate the impact rising interest rates could have on students.

Campus Progress reports it will be organizing about 200 young people for a lobby day on Capitol Hill on Wednesday. It issued a statement calling the House approach a “step in the wrong direction.” Organizers of Young Invincibles will be joining in efforts June 5 and trying to get 1 million signatures on its online petition to keep interest rates low.

California Groups Push to Enroll Young Adults in ACA Coverage

California Healthline on June 3, 2013

In California, more than two million residents ages 19 to 34 are uninsured, according to the UCLA Center for Health Policy Research.

Many young residents who are not covered by employer-sponsored health plans or by their parents’ insurance might be eligible for Medi-Cal — California’s Medicaid program — or to purchase plans through Covered California, the state’s health insurance exchange.

Health care leaders want young adults to enroll in health plans to balance the effect of having older, sicker patients in the insurance marketplace.

Health Leaders’ Concerns

Under the ACA, nearly every U.S. resident will be required to have health insurance beginning in 2014 or face a fine of $95 or 1% of their household income in the first year.

However, some observers are concerned that the fine is not enough to convince young people to sign up for coverage.

Oscar Hidalgo — a spokesperson for Covered California — said, “The penalty itself will not convince a young person, or any other person” to purchase insurance. He said, “Young people will need to understand the risks of not having health insurance.”

Larry Levitt — a senior vice president at the Kaiser Family Foundation — said that the success of the ACA “depends on reaching everyone who is uninsured, but particularly young people who may feel like they don’t need insurance.” According to Levitt, convincing young adults to spend money on health insurance will be a “marketing challenge.”

Boosting Outreach to Young Adults

Hidalgo said that Covered California is developing media messaging for young adults that is “a little edgier” than outreach efforts for older individuals. He said that the exchange seeks to promote the financial security of having coverage, telling young adults that a health plan can help save them money if they are hospitalized from events such as a car accident or a sudden illness.

Covered California also has granted millions of dollars to universities and public schools to help the campuses educate young adults about the exchange and help them enroll in health plans.

Tamika Butler — the California director of The Young Invincibles, a policy and advocacy organization — said the organization has launched a campaign and a mobile health application to raise awareness among young adults about health coverage.

She said the organization is encouraging young people to purchase insurance to have financial peace of mind and to receive preventive medical and mental health care services (Gorman, Los Angeles Times, 6/2).