• Alrena Dale, 61, got $155,000 in student loans discharged through bankruptcy.
• Biden's new bankruptcy guidance, aimed at easing the process for borrowers, made that possible.
• Some attorneys told BI that the new guidance is a big help, but more outreach would be helpful.

Alrena Dale, 61, had her six-figure student-loan balance wiped out after decades of payments. She's one of hundreds of borrowers who have received relief after new changes to the bankruptcy process.

Though Dale filed over five years ago, President Joe Biden's new bankruptcy guidance, which streamlined the information she needed to provide in order to qualify for relief, was a turning point in her case.

In August 2023, Dale was finally relieved of her $155,000 balance, according to documents reviewed by Business Insider.

"There were no words. I was excited. I cried," Dale, who'd attended an online business bachelor's and master's program but struggled to find employment in her field, told BI. She worked multiple minimum-wage jobs at a time to afford her student-loan payments alongside her monthly expenses. "I really honestly didn't believe it until I got my discharge papers."

The reason it was so difficult for Dale and many other student-loan borrowers to seek relief in bankruptcy court before 2022 is that borrowers had to prove an "undue hardship" standard, in which they had to show that they cannot maintain a minimal standard of living, that their circumstances aren't likely to improve, and that they have made a good-faith effort to repay their debt.

That standard was an extremely high bar for borrowers to meet. The Biden administration's guidance changed that by establishing clearer guidelines for borrowers to meet undue hardship, and it allowed borrowers to complete a self-attestation form, allowing the bankruptcy process to move quicker and avoid investigations into their backgrounds.

Some bankruptcy attorneys told BI that the new guidance has made student-loan bankruptcy much more achievable for borrowers, with some having seen quick success after decades of stagnancy. Still, they said many lawyers are reluctant to lean into the new process, and more outreach and education on navigating bankruptcy for student loans would help.

Dale said the overwhelming emotion she now feels is relief.

"Knowing that I don't have to go out and work a second job just to pay it back because they've removed it for me, I really can't thank them enough," Dale said. "I have no words because I'm just happy and grateful and thankful."

'It's given us so much hope'

Bob and Tammy Branson, a bankruptcy attorney and senior paralegal, respectively, successfully represented Dale in her bankruptcy proceedings.

Tammy said that over the past 25 years, it was nearly impossible to discharge their clients' student loans in bankruptcy — but after the new guidance, she said their law firm has successfully discharged over $1 million in student loans.

"Now we're actually getting people not just to the point of treading water, but we're getting them out of the water," Bob said.

Dustin Baker, a bankruptcy attorney in Iowa, has seen similar success with the new guidance. Baker told BI that before November 2022, he advised his clients that considering a student-loan discharge wasn't worth their effort because it was so difficult to achieve, and he didn't want to take his clients' money for litigation he wasn't confident would be successful.

But once the guidance was announced, Baker said he's eliminated student debt for about a dozen of his clients, with a few more in the pipeline. He said his "biggest excitement" with the new process is the self-attestation form, which directly tells borrowers the questions they need to answer to get approved for a discharge, making communication between the borrower and the government easier.

The Justice Department released new data in July on how the process was going since the new guidance was announced. It showed that 588 new cases were filed from October 2023 to March 2024 — a 34% increase from the prior 6-month period. New data BI obtained from Sen. Elizabeth Warren in October showed that nearly 900 borrowers sought out the process in fiscal year 2024, and 85% of borrowers who filed using the new guidance received a full or partial discharge.

Baker said his experience incorporating the new guidance into his work was "very easy," and he added that members of the Justice Department gave attorneys in his area training sessions. However, Tammy and Bob said more education and outreach would be helpful because some lawyers are unsure if the new process is worth it.

Still, it's clear the guidance works, and Tammy said she hopes that continues.

"It's given us so much hope," she said.

'I would've had to work another job'

The new bankruptcy process for student-loan borrowers still isn't perfect. Igor Roitburg, a former attorney and senior managing director at Stretto — a bankruptcy services and technology firm — told BI that the timeline for borrowers to receive a bankruptcy decision can still widely vary and that uncertainty is a roadblock for some borrowers and attorneys to participate.

"For them to invest time and effort into a new process that they're uncertain about if they don't see results for months and months and months, makes it hard for them to commit to the process and offer it as a global service to all their clients," Roitburg said.

Dale said she saw no other option but to file for bankruptcy, regardless of whether it would be successful. Once the new guidance was released, the self-attestation form allowed Dale to prove that her financial circumstances were unlikely to improve, qualifying her for relief.

She now works at a call center and said she can't afford to retire yet. If she had the opportunity to do things differently, she might have considered going to a trade school to avoid the student-debt burden.

"I'm just making the best of what I have to work with right now," she said, adding that if she didn't see success through bankruptcy, "I would've had to work another job just to pay the student loans."

Have you successfully discharged your student loans in bankruptcy? Are you struggling with the process? Share your story with this reporter at [email protected].

• President-elect Donald Trump has called on Congress to raise or eliminate the debt ceiling.
• He said doing so before his term would put the onus on Joe Biden and let him avoid an early fight.
• Going over the debt ceiling could lead to a default and a deep recession.

The debt ceiling is the unexpected debate in Washington this week after President-elect Donald Trump threw the annual holiday-season government-funding talks into disarray.

Trump said he wanted to raise or eliminate the limit on how much the federal government can borrow. Doing so now would mean the much-debated move would happen on President Joe Biden's watch and be resolved before Trump takes office, when he'll want to implement his agenda without a fight over borrowing limits.

"Congress must get rid of, or extend out to, perhaps, 2029, the ridiculous Debt Ceiling," Trump wrote Friday in a Truth Social post. "Without this, we should never make a deal. Remember, the pressure is on whoever is President.'"

This all comes amid a chaotic scramble to reach a funding deal for the US government and avoid a shutdown when Friday ends. The debt ceiling was one of the sticking points Trump used to scrap a bipartisan deal to keep the government funded through March. Now he's revisiting a much-used political tool.

"Trump is right to identify that he doesn't want his fingerprints on increasing the debt ceiling, and he doesn't want to have to deal with it in six months while he's trying to pass what he considers a must-pass tax-extension bill," Elizabeth Pancotti, the director of special initiatives at the left-leaning Roosevelt Institute think tank, told Business Insider.

A debt-ceiling breach has become a political tool — one that Trump is trying to wield for the last time

The debt ceiling limits the amount of money the federal government is allowed to borrow to pay for its programs and operations. If it's not regularly raised or suspended, the US government risks defaulting on its debt and failing to pay its bills.

This could compromise everyday Americans' access to crucial government programs such as Social Security, Medicaid, and housing vouchers. Len Burman, a fellow at the think tank Urban Institute, told BI that a default could also cause interest rates to rise drastically if investors no longer viewed the US government as a creditworthy borrower. That would mean Americans may face higher rates on mortgages and credit cards, which could lead to a broader financial crisis and deep recession.

Because of these widespread consequences, the debt ceiling has evolved into a political bargaining chip, and the US has repeatedly come close to breaching it over partisan disagreements, most recently in 2023. That's why some Democrats have long advocated abolishing the ceiling, arguing that Republicans weaponize it to push spending cuts. Sen. Elizabeth Warren capitalized on Trump's recent comments, writing Thursday morning on X that she agreed with him on terminating the debt limit.

During recent debt-ceiling standoffs, various plans to sidestep the limit were floated. Democratic Rep. Jamie Raskin told BI that the president could invoke a clause in the 14th Amendment that would declare a default and the debt ceiling that caused that default unconstitutional.

Other ideas to eliminate the debt ceiling have included minting a $1 trillion platinum coin, which some economists have said would allow the Treasury secretary to deposit the coin to pay off debts.

In an interview with Fox News Digital on Thursday, Trump said that Republicans who didn't support repealing the debt limit could face primary challenges; many Republicans have historically opposed getting rid of it, arguing that it's a check on borrowing. Trump told NBC News that Democrats had signaled they wanted to get rid of the debt limit and that he would "lead the charge" to do so.

The country will technically hit the debt ceiling at the start of next year, but the Treasury Department can hold off default and keep paying the bills through various accounting tricks, likely until late spring or early summer.

• Biden's administration posted notices to withdraw its broader student-loan-forgiveness plans.
• Amid lawsuits, the Education Department wrote that it stands by the legality of its debt-relief plans.
• The plans aimed to cancel some student debt for over 38 million borrowers.

President Joe Biden's administration has officially scrapped its unfinished rules for broad student-loan forgiveness.

The Education Department posted notices to withdraw its plans to cancel student debt for over 38 million borrowers. The withdrawal notices were for two of the department's unfinished debt-relief rules. The first rule was Biden's Plan B for broader debt relief after the Supreme Court struck his first plan down in summer 2023. The second rule was a proposal to provide relief to borrowers facing financial hardship.

In the notices to withdraw the unfinished rules, the Education Department said it is focused on helping student-loan borrowers manage the remaining elements of the return to repayment that began last year following the pandemic pause.

The department said that withdrawing these regulations will give future stakeholders the flexibility to craft new forms of relief, especially with the uncertainty the incoming administration brings. Trump has previously criticized broad relief and is unlikely to continue Biden's efforts.

The department also said that the withdrawal of these rules is not a result of the questions surrounding their legality, saying that it believes the relief "is authorized by the Secretary's longstanding and existing authority" under the Higher Education Act.

Biden's Plan B for student-loan forgiveness would have benefited over 30 million borrowers. It proposed full or partial relief for categories including borrowers with unpaid interest and those who have made at least 20 years of payments. While the rule was never finalized, a group of GOP-led states filed a lawsuit in September to block its implementation.

Meanwhile, the Education Department proposed a separate rule in October to provide relief to 8 million borrowers facing financial hardship. Those categories would have included borrowers facing challenges with childcare or medical expenses.

The Education Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Business Insider on the withdrawal of the plans.

Biden is still pursuing other avenues for debt relief before his term is up. On Friday, his administration announced an additional $4.28 billion in debt relief for 54,900 borrowers in Public Service Loan Forgiveness — a result of ongoing improvements to the program. Despite not being able to pass broad relief, Biden, over the course of his term, has provided relief to nearly 5 million borrowers through changes to various programs.

Some Republican lawmakers lauded the withdrawal of the plans. Sen. Bill Cassidy, the top Republican on the Senate education committee, said in a Friday statement that Biden's "student loan schemes were always a lie."

Meanwhile, some advocates criticized the GOP-led challenges to Biden's relief efforts. Persis Yu, the deputy executive director of the advocacy group Student Borrower Protection Center, said in a statement that Biden's plans "would have freed millions from the crushing weight of the student debt crisis and unlocked economic mobility for millions more workers and families."

"We are deeply grateful to President Biden for the work he did to fight for the 40 million borrowers trapped in student debt," Yu said.

• Biden announced $4.28 billion in student-debt cancellation for 54,900 borrowers in Public Service Loan Forgiveness.
• The relief is a result of the Education Department's ongoing fixes to PSLF.
• President-elect Donald Trump is unlikely to continue Biden's student-debt relief efforts.

President Joe Biden announced more student-loan forgiveness with one month left until he leaves the White House.

On Friday, Biden and his Education Department said they have approved $4.28 billion in student debt for 54,900 borrowers in the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program, which forgives student debt for government and nonprofit workers after 10 years of qualifying payments.

The relief is a result of ongoing improvements to PSLF, including a waiver that expired in October 2022 that allowed payments that previously did not qualify for relief to count toward borrowers' forgiveness progress.

"Four years ago, the Biden-Harris Administration made a pledge to America's teachers, service members, nurses, first responders, and other public servants that we would fix the broken Public Service Loan Forgiveness Program, and I'm proud to say that we delivered," Education Secretary Miguel Cardona said in a statement.

This latest relief brings the total student-loan forgiveness under Biden to about $180 billion for nearly 5 million Americans, including $78 billion for just over 1 million borrowers enrolled in PSLF.

It's unclear if the Biden administration will announce more student-debt relief before President-elect Donald Trump takes office on January 20. Still, it caps off a tumultuous past few years for student-loan borrowers hoping for broad debt relief — Biden's first student-loan forgiveness plan was struck down by the Supreme Court last summer, and his Plan B for debt relief is now in court following legal challenging from Republican-led states.

On top of that, 8 million borrowers enrolled in the SAVE plan — Biden's new income-driven repayment plan intended to make monthly payments cheaper with a shorter timeline to forgiveness — are in limbo as they wait for a court to decide if the plan can move forward.

Even if Biden's plans for broader relief do survive their legal challenges, it's unlikely Trump's administration would continue those efforts. Preston Cooper, a senior fellow at the conservative-leaning American Enterprise Institute, previously told Business Insider that Biden "has taken a stance of, 'We want to try and forgive as much debt as possible through various different programs.'"

"And to put it mildly, we're not going to see that same attitude under the Trump administration," Cooper said.

Trump proposed eliminating PSLF during his first term, but doing so requires congressional approval. Republican control of Congress and the White House means that Trump would likely have more success achieving his goals.

"From Day One of my Administration, I promised to make sure that higher education is a ticket to the middle class, not a barrier to opportunity," Biden said in a statement. "Because of our actions, millions of people across the country now have the breathing room to start businesses, save for retirement, and pursue life plans they had to put on hold because of the burden of student loan debt."

Joshua McGoun, a K-12 public-school teacher in Frederick, Maryland, first noticed a change in his students about 10 years ago. They began to struggle with focus.

Increasingly, younger kids were not nailing basic reading skills before third grade — a crucial window. Those who miss it have a tough road ahead in middle and high school. Even adept readers in their tweens and teens have become afraid of complex or extended reading tasks and more comfortable with short texts or bite-size summaries.

McGoun, who has a doctorate in education, shared one stark example. With struggling readers, he hands each child a book upside down and backward. "They should be able to turn the book the right way up and open it at the first page," he said. These days, "some students aren't able to do that."

This is not unusual. Across the US, kids are struggling to read. Last year, reading performance for fourth graders hit its lowest level since 2005, and teachers expect that number to keep tumbling.

The panic to turn things around quickly is driving a wedge between teachers, politicians, and parents, all pointing the finger of blame at one another.

The Senate education committee, calling it a crisis, is pushing school districts to retrain teachers in a trendy new teaching style called "the science of reading," which has dramatically improved literacy in some areas (scroll down for more detail on that). Parents with resources to do so are moving their kids to schools that tout science-backed teaching styles.

Some teachers and policy experts worry this frenzy may have an ironic side effect, putting pressure on public schools to resolve a problem that cannot be tackled in the classroom alone.

"It makes the task of teaching harder," McGoun said, referring to new literacy programs and a focus on test results. "We're burning out at a faster rate, and it's causing a lot of apathy."

Gen Alpha kids, aged 2 to 12, need to discover the joy of reading, he and other teachers say. It's doable, but it's a more creative and slower process that many parents don't have time to wait for.

Teaching a 6-year-old to read is political

There has never been a golden age for reading scores in America. The record high was in 2017, when 37% of US fourth graders pass their NAEP reading test — just 5% higher than the most recent results.

Still, this new low raised alarm among lawmakers who were already concerned about screens and loneliness among Gen Alpha.

“The long-term implications will be dire” if literacy does not improve, Sen. Bill Cassidy, the top Republican on the Senate education committee, said in February. “We are at risk of having an entire generation of children, those who were in their prime learning years during the COVID-19 pandemic, fail to become productive adults if reading proficiency does not improve.”

His proposed solution? Get all teachers to use the same, evidence-backed teaching style.

Teaching styles have served as political footballs for over 100 years. The fierce, ongoing debate — known as the “reading wars” — dates back to at least the mid-19th century, when Horace Mann, then Massachusetts’ education secretary, slammed the alphabet as “skeleton-shaped, bloodless, ghostly apparitions” and said children should be taught whole words rather than their structure.

While teaching unions maintain that teachers should be able to draw from various teaching styles, it’s a tough sell with parents.

“Parents and others are getting upset about their kids’ literacy curriculum because they've heard that there's a certain way to teach kids how to read, and that might not be properly implemented in schools,” Carly Robinson, a senior education researcher at Stanford University, said.

Recently, the “science of reading” method (see chart below) has been touted as a silver bullet that transformed literacy rates in Mississippi between 2013 and 2019 — even in areas with high child-poverty rates, which typically correlate with lower literacy levels. It became known as the “Mississippi Miracle.”

In a February report, the Senate education committee said teachers who still used other methods — particularly the three-cueing system — were setting students “up for failure in the long run.”

TEACHING STYLES

In other states, parents want a Mississippi Miracle of their own.

Susie Coughlin, a mom in Falmouth, Maine, found herself going down rabbit holes about literacy techniques after her 5-year-old daughter, Carter, repeated kindergarten. Despite spending a second year at that level, the little girl had fallen behind in reading and writing.

One day, near the end of the school year, Coughlin saw a piece of Carter’s homework where she had written, “I went to the osen,” rather than, “I went to the ocean.” The teacher had not corrected the mistake because the emphasis was on visual cues — a picture of the sea — rather than spelling. Coughlin was appalled; spelling was why Carter struggled to keep up in other classes. The mom took up her concerns with the teacher, who, she said, defended the visual method.

Coughlin said that the impression the teacher gave off was that the school was "just going to let your child slide through." "So we hit the brakes."

Carter finished the year, but her parents elected to send her to a private Catholic school for first grade. In her new school, Carter was taught to “sound it out” — articulating the word as she read it rather than scanning pages for context cues.

Her progress was dramatic, Coughlin said. Now 8 years old, Carter thrives in her second-grade reading classes. “It broke my heart when her confidence was in the toilet at her old school, but her bucket of self-esteem is filling up,” Coughlin, who has since enrolled Carter’s younger brother at the same school, added.

Coughlin said her family was fortunate to have the resources to go private because the annual fees at the Catholic school are relatively low: $10,000 a child, compared with about $40,000 for secular private schools in Falmouth.

Forty-five states and Washington, DC, are considering bills that would retrain public school teachers in new, evidence-based reading practices. Susan Neuman, a professor of childhood and literacy education at New York University and an education official under President George W. Bush, said the bills represented “the biggest, boldest, and most inclusive effort to date to promote high-quality, scientifically supported reading instruction for all children,” adding: “We cannot fail.”

Educators are not so bullish about another initiative that requires retraining and devotion to new materials that cost hundreds or thousands of dollars a year, preventing creativity with the syllabus.

“The problem is that some school districts think: ‘We pay for this program, and therefore you have to use this program.’ You can't use anything else,” McGoun said.

While his school allows for flexibility, he’s seen panic take over in other districts, he said: “As a teacher, you can't even make your own materials. It’s because the school district attended a conference and learned about a particular program — they promised XYZ outcomes if you only use its resources.”

Nailing the right method is not a teacher’s biggest concern, McGoun said. “The most important thing an educator can do is provide good pedagogy by focusing on the student’s interests,” he said. “When you have motivated students, they will read.”

Kids are falling out of love with the written word

Students, McGoun said, have “fallen out of love” with the written word because the march of technology has made it seem “alien” and “outmoded” to them.

Parents know tearing a school-age child away from a phone is no easy feat. No matter what literacy technique you employ, the pull of screens tends to be stronger.

There are efforts to leverage technology to help with literacy. Some artificial-intelligence programs, already appearing in classrooms, listen to students read aloud and give them instant feedback on pronunciation and comprehension, an alternative to having students play a reading game for 10 minutes on their own.

Subtitles on TV shows have proved beneficial for early readers by presenting words on a screen that a child will read, sometimes without even realizing it — so much so that the actor Jack Black joined a campaign to promote subtitles to boost kids’ literacy.

Tara West, a former kindergarten teacher and the founder of the literary-coaching organization Little Minds at Work, believes the benefits of constructive tech could outweigh the harm of kids spending too much time on screens. “Kids gravitate toward anything that’s digital,” so teachers can take advantage of that, West said, adding: “Technology is going to go far.”

Getting teachers on board may not be easy. In a recent Pew survey of elementary-school teachers, 47% of respondents said they weren’t sure how AI in classrooms would influence their students’ learning.

Jeff Jarvis, a public-school teacher in Los Angeles, is skeptical about the tech method. Sure, it might work in small groups, “but you’d almost definitely be struggling to use it effectively in a large class with 25 kids,” he said.

Educational digital media is “often attached to visuals, not texts,” Jarvis said, adding: “They’re getting quick blurbs from Snapchat and TikTok but nothing in-depth.”

Teachers like Jarvis and McGoun say that, at the most basic level, kids should be surrounded by books to simply learn how they work — turning physical pages instead of swiping on an iPad, for example. That’s where parents come in.

Pavel Buyeu, a 43-year-old dad from Seattle, said that when his daughter, Liza, now 15, began to show a reluctance to read, he feared she’d miss out on the joy and satisfaction of discovering books as a kid.

“Liza and I are from different generations with different interests,” Buyeu said. Still, he said he would like to see her enjoy some of the books he loved when he was younger. “My favorites were ‘The Adventures of Tom Sawyer,’ ‘The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn,’ and ‘The Little Prince,’” he told Business Insider.

Buyeu devised a “game” to make reading fun for Liza. He’d take his daughter to the bookstore and have her pick a title in return for privileges like sleeping in on weekends. The pair read and discussed the books before writing an alternative ending to the plot. Family members voted on a winner, which motivated Liza even more.

“Reading became a joy for her,” Buyeu said, adding that Liza’s reading speed and spelling improved, said.

Buyeu’s game speaks to the power of parental involvement — a luxury not afforded to every kid.

Parents with means are paying for tutoring

Learning to read isn’t just about getting a grade; it can reverberate throughout someone’s career and personal life. Want to vote? It helps to be able to read and comprehend complex material.

If not all students become readers in school, you will start to see “the haves and the have-nots,” Neuman, the former education official, said — people with the money to pay for extra help moving ahead in school and life, and those relying on public resources falling behind.

Kumon, a private company that provides after-school math and reading tutoring, has recorded a recent surge in its number of new students, with enrollment increasing by 56% between 2020 and 2024. The company’s methodology incorporates both meaning-based instruction and phonics.

Kalisha Brooks of Indian Land, South Carolina, enrolled her son, Corey, at Kumon when he was in kindergarten during the COVID-19 pandemic. She was worried that the disruption of the health crisis might set him back.

“I’d read articles about children being home and getting further and further behind,” Brooks said. So she bit the bullet, budgeting an extra $200 a month for Corey to have twice-weekly reading classes. She’s glad she did. Corey, now 8, performed above average in second grade and is now in third with a renewed confidence in reading.

Jessica Mercedes Penzari, a 40-year-old mom in New York City, can relate to Brooks’ dilemma. Her son Hendrix's kindergarten report card showed that he had dramatically fallen behind in reading within months. “It was a moment of panic,” Penzari said. “Once you fall behind, getting caught up is so difficult. I thought, ‘I’m slipping as a mom because my eye isn’t on the ball.’”

Penzari secured a private tutor — a special-education teacher who lived in her building. She babysat the woman’s kids in exchange for the typically $75-an-hour lessons. It proved successful. Hendrix, who recently entered second grade, is back at proficiency level and above grade level in some subcategories.

Children who have fewer educational resources find themselves a step behind their peers at the outset. Just 10% of multilingual students can read proficiently by fourth grade compared with 33% of fourth graders overall, the NAEP found.

Last year, Nichelle Watkins, who lives in public housing in Baltimore, told Fox 45 News that her fourth-grade son, Logan, still could not read and that they couldn’t afford tutoring.

“How is he supposed to be productive if he can’t read?” she said in the news segment.

“They go there to be babysat for eight hours and come home,” the mom added, referring to Logan’s elementary school. She said legislators — to whom she later wrote pleading for improvements — ignored the problem.

“I feel like they don’t care. It’s not their children,” she said.

What now?

Linda McMahon, President-elect Donald Trump’s pick to lead his Education Department, will have a mammoth managerial job on her hands if she is confirmed.

McMahon, a former wrestling executive who sat on the Board of Trustees for Sacred Heart University and served one year on Connecticut’s Board of Education, supports Trump’s plans to deliver funds for education directly to states, giving them the authority to choose how to spend the money. She’s sparked anger from some educators who argue her plans would hurt public schools. She has also been accused in a recent lawsuit of enabling sexual abuse of kids in the WWE. McMahon has denied the allegation, and the lawsuit is on hold while another court rules on the constitutionality of such cases.

In an emailed statement, Trump-Vance transition spokesperson Liz Huston told BI that McMahon "is ready to deliver on President Trump's agenda to restore America's education system and prepare our next generation for the future."

Robinson, the Stanford researcher, said teachers would need much more funding to implement all the new bipartisan reading policies coming through states. Still, it’s not enough to simply shower schools with cash — smart policies are key. “Just giving money without any guidelines isn't actually that helpful if you want it to be directed in a certain way,” Robinson said.

In the meantime, all of these moving parts have created a divide between parents and teachers, who point the finger of blame at each other. It’s easier to take on someone close to you than to tackle unanswerable questions, such as, “how much have screens derailed attention spans?”, and “how much education funding is enough to make a difference?”

Jarvis, the special education teacher in LA, said he understands parents’ frustration that something so fundamental to modern life now feels impossible. He agreed that federal funding for literacy programs is essential to stop reading rates from tumbling further.

In the meantime, he said that parents can make a major difference by engaging in reading with their children at home. Take your kids to libraries, the teacher said. Let your kids see you reading books at home, he added, to create motivation and a rich environment for “reading to flourish.”

“Put down your own electronic devices and read with your kids, even if it’s just for 15 minutes a day,” Jarvis said. “Let them read aloud to you and then ask questions about the text. It’s important to have parent-child time away from technology.”

• The House of Representatives failed to pass a pared-down spending bill.
• The vote came after President-elect Donald Trump tanked a bipartisan version that looked set to pass.
• The move pushes the government closer to a holiday shutdown.

The House of Representatives on Thursday failed to pass a stripped-down spending bill following a tumultuous 48 hours on the Hill, pushing the government closer to a partial shutdown right before the holidays.

Republicans in the House said they had settled on a new version of the continuing resolution ahead of the vote on Thursday after President-elect Donald Trump tanked a previous spending bill that initially won bipartisan support.

But the final vote was 174-235-1. Thirty-eight Republicans flouted Trump and voted against the continuing resolution.

On Wednesday, Trump came out hard against the original continuing resolution, urging Republican lawmakers to renegotiate the bill and threatening to primary those who failed to fall in line.

The president-elect's apparent turnabout came after billionaire Elon Musk publicly backed the idea of shutting down the government until the day Trump is inaugurated. Musk railed against the resolution, which he said included items unrelated to government funding, such as pay raises for lawmakers and pandemic preparedness.

Musk, who has been tapped to lead the Department of Government Efficiency alongside fellow billionaire Vivek Ramaswamy, celebrated the pared-down spending bill ahead of the failed Thursday vote.

"This shows how much your voice matters!" the Tesla CEO wrote on X. "And having a President like @realDonaldTrump means that your voice is finally heard."

Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle seem to agree that Musk played a major role in killing the original bill. Some have expressed concern about the outsized influence Musk seems to have on Trump. The president-elect, for his part, has pushed back on suggestions that Musk is the one in control.

The continuing resolution that failed to pass on Thursday was smaller in scope than the original legislation. Among the items cut from the bipartisan resolution included funding for a child cancer research program, funding for research on premature labor, money for treatment of sickle cell disease, money for early cancer detection, a program for Down syndrome research, and an anti-deepfake porn bill.

The newer version of the resolution would have kept the government funded through mid-March and suspended the nation's debt ceiling until January 2027.

Trump encouraged Republican lawmakers to back the new version of the bill on Thursday.

House Democrats, on the other hand, expressed frustration about the series of events. CNN reported Thursday that Democrats could be heard chanting "hell no" during a caucus meeting ahead of the vote.

If lawmakers fail to reach an agreement, a partial shutdown would lead to suspended funding for many government entities and withheld paychecks for thousands of federal employees right before the holidays.

• Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy pressured Republicans to scrap their bill to keep the government funded.
• The US government is now set to shut down early Saturday morning if Congress doesn't act.
• A shutdown would furlough thousands of federal workers, impacting programs many Americans rely on.

The US is once again on the brink of a government shutdown following intense pressure from President-elect Donald Trump and his newly created DOGE commission.

It would mean federal workers are temporarily out of work, and Americans could experience slowdowns at airport security and customer-service delays for programs like Social Security. During the last government shutdown under Trump, national parks shuttered and flights were delayed or rerouted because of limited transportation staffing.

The possibility of a shutdown starting at 12:01 a.m. Saturday comes after the House of Representatives seemed poised this week to approve a continuing resolution to keep the government funded through March. However, following intense criticism on social media from Trump and the leaders of his new Department of Government Efficiency, Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, House Republicans scrapped the bill.

They took issue with the inclusion of a range of items in the bill that they said were not relevant to government funding, including pandemic preparedness and a pay raise for lawmakers.

Ramaswamy posted on X on Wednesday morning that the bill is "full of excessive spending, special interest giveaways & pork barrel politics."

Musk also wrote on X on Wednesday that a government shutdown is "infinitely better than passing a horrible bill."

Trump and his vice president-elect, JD Vance, released a joint statement Wednesday saying the resolution would "give Congress a pay increase while many Americans are struggling this Christmas."

Now, Congress must find a new funding solution in just over 24 hours, leaving Americans on the brink of the first government shutdown since 2018. Here's what that could mean.

What happens in a government shutdown

Every federal agency is required to prepare for a government shutdown by creating contingency plans to submit to the Office of Management and Budget. Each agency outlines how it will structure its workforce in a shutdown, including how many workers it will furlough and for how long.

This means federal workers would be affected first, with many finding themselves temporarily out of work. The longer the shutdown lasts, the more severe the consequences for Americans would be, but if federal workers are furloughed, agencies will be strained to carry out their usual daily functions.

For example, the Social Security Administration's latest contingency plan said it expects to furlough 8,103 of its 59,000 employees at the start of a shutdown. This means that while Social Security payments would still continue to reach Americans, customer service would be limited for beneficiaries dealing with payment issues.

During a government shutdown, active-duty military service members would remain on duty but may go unpaid until funding is restored. The Department of Education's latest contingency plan, from 2023, said that it would have to pause most of its grantmaking activities during a shutdown, including its review of grant applications from local school districts.

The Department of Transportation's contingency plan in 2024 said that while facility service inspections and air-traffic-controller training would cease, essential services like air travel would continue. The Department of Homeland Security's most recent contingency plan said that the Transportation Security Administration would furlough over 2,000 workers, likely resulting in longer wait times for travelers at airports.

The US Postal Service, however, would not be affected by a shutdown because it's an independent agency.

Additionally, a 2023 brief from the progressive think tank Center for American Progress said that a number of federal programs "immediately cease" during federal shutdowns, including the processing of new small business loan applications, workplace safety inspections, NASA research programs, and federal loans to farmers.

The collapse of the previous deal means the clock is ticking for both parties to come to an agreement on avoiding a government shutdown before the weekend.

Karine Jean-Pierre, the White House press secretary, criticized the recent government shutdown threats in a statement Wednesday.

"Triggering a damaging government shutdown would hurt families who are gathering to meet with their loved ones and endanger the basic services Americans from veterans to Social Security recipients rely on," she said. "A deal is a deal. Republicans should keep their word."

• The Federal Reserve cut interest rates in its final decision of the year.
• It also penciled in two interest-rate cuts in 2025.
• Still, Powell said that Trump's proposed trade policies pose economic uncertainty.

President-elect Donald Trump's potential trade policies could change the Federal Reserve's plans in the coming year.

On Wednesday, the Federal Open Market Committee announced its third consecutive interest-rate cut of the year, lowering rates by 25 basis points. Alongside the rate cut announcement, the Federal Reserve's quarterly Summary of Economic Projections also penciled in two interest-rate cuts for 2025, based on the median prediction from voting Fed members.

Markets took a dive after the Fed announcement, with the Dow Jones Industrial Average closing down over 1,100 points, or about 2.6%.

Fed chair Jerome Powell said during the Wednesday press conference that the decision to cut rates in December was "a closer call" but ultimately "the best decision" to achieve the Fed's dual mandate of maximum employment and price stability.

"I feel very good about where the economy is. Honestly, I'm very optimistic about the economy, and we're in a really good place. Our policy is in a really good place. I expect another good year next year," Powell said.

However, Powell said Trump's proposed tariff plans pose more uncertainty to the US economy in the coming year.

The president-elect has suggested he would impose broad tariffs on imports from key trading partners with the US, including China, Mexico, and Canada, which could lead to higher prices for imported goods.

At this point, Powell said there is too much uncertainty around Trump's trade plans to make any concrete predictions about next year's policy decisions at this point.

"We just don't know really very much at all about the actual policy, so it's very premature to try to make any kind of conclusion," Powell said. "We don't know what will be tariffed, from what countries, for how long, in what size. We don't know whether there'll be retaliatory tariffs. We don't know what the transmission of any of that will be into consumer prices."

Additionally, Powell said some FOMC members did consider fiscal policy, like tariffs, in their economic predictions, showing how the Fed is facing a range of uncertain scenarios in 2025.

He said that once Trump unveils his policies, the Fed would consider any necessary changes to its policy, but "we're just not at that stage."

Over the past year, Powell has reiterated that the Fed should move more cautiously instead of risking cutting rates prematurely and having to course correct later on. That's still the Fed's outlook going into the new year as the central bank continues its goal of reaching 2% inflation.

Amid economic progress over the past year, Powell said that inflation is coming down at a slower pace than the Fed would prefer. The consumer price index, which measures inflation, rose 2.7% year-over-year in November, a slight uptick from the 2.6% reading in October.

"When the path is uncertain, you go a little bit slower," Powell said. "It's not unlike driving on a foggy night or walking into a dark room full of furniture, you just slow down."

• 56 million US workers lack employer-provided pension or retirement savings plans.
• A new AARP report highlights the financial insecurity facing workers without retirement plans.
• Those workers would likely have difficulty living solely off Social Security.

Many Americans don't feel ready for retirement — and their jobs aren't stepping in to fill in the economic gaps.

A new analysis from the AARP Public Policy Institute finds that, in 2022, 56 million Americans — nearly half of the private-sector workforce — worked for employers who didn't offer pension or retirement savings plans.

Workers with less education and lower earnings were less likely to have access to plans. Specifically, AARP said that about 75% of private-sector workers with less than a high school degree, 50% of workers with some college, and 31% of workers with a bachelor's degree do not have a retirement plan. On top of that, about 79% of workers earning $53,000 or less annually and 21% of workers earning over $53,000 do not have retirement plans.

David John, one of the AARP report's authors, told Business Insider that even while those workers would get Social Security benefits, they likely wouldn't be enough to supplement other expenses.

"The fact is that if you are a career lower-income individual, yes, Social Security is going to replace a higher proportion of your earnings, but you still have the emergencies that are going to come up," John said. "And that includes things like car repair, cost of medication, house repair — hot water heaters don't really care who you are at the time they decide to fail."

The AARP report said that, with the average Social Security benefit totaling around $1,767 a month in 2022, most retirees will need additional income sources to stay financially afloat.

"We have a substantial number of people who don't have sufficient retirement savings to supplement their Social Security. Social Security is it for a substantial number of people," John said. "And that means, essentially, that they may not have the kind of retirement that they dreamed of."

The report uses data from the Census Bureau's Current Population Survey on employer coverage, which provides data on Americans' work, earnings, and education, and adjusts it by factoring in additional data from the Survey of Consumer Finances and IRS to bring the findings in line with the overall population, allowing the researchers to break out specific demographic groups.

Financial security remains a top concern for many older adults. A recent report from the Alliance for Lifetime Income's Retirement Income Institute found that in 2024, over 30 million Americans born between 1959 and 1964 — the tail end of the baby boomer generation — will start turning 65, meaning many of them will increasingly start to rely on retirement savings. Without a retirement plan, some previously told BI they would likely have to continue working to supplement their Social Security.

Some states have taken steps to aid workers who do not have access to retirement plans through their employers. California created a program in 2019 called CalSavers, which requires employers in the state who do not sponsor a retirement plan to provide individual retirement accounts that employees are automatically enrolled into unless they opt out. John said that some variation on that type of plan could work at the federal level.

"The basic model or the basic way the state programs are structured can be a guide to help create a national solution to the retirement coverage problem," he said.

The latest Social Security and Medicare Board of Trustees report found that Social Security will only be able to pay out full benefits for the next 11 years if Congress does not intervene.

John said that the lack of coverage goes beyond just weighing down individuals — it could also have a drag on the wider economy.

"If we have a substantial number of people who don't have sufficient resources, they're going to put pressure on governments," he said. Those retirees will likely be more dependent on government programs like housing, healthcare, and senior citizen centers. "There is an expense to the economy and there is an expense to frankly the future by not dealing with this problem."

Do you not receive retirement benefits through work and are worried about your future? Contact these reporters at [email protected] and [email protected].

• The Federal Reserve is expected to cut interest rates this week by 25 basis points.
• Inflation has ticked back up in recent months, and economists think the job market is still robust.
• The outlook for 2025 is more uncertain while the Fed waits to see how Trump will impact the economy.

The final interest-rate decision of the year is coming this week, and it's likely to give Americans some more financial relief.

On Wednesday, the Federal Open Market Committee is expected to announce another interest-rate cut. As of Monday afternoon, CME FedWatch, which estimates interest-rate changes based on market predictions, forecasts a close to 100% chance the Federal Reserve will cut rates by 25 basis points.

Data out last week showed overall inflation has sped up. The consumer price index's year-over-year growth rate rose from 2.4% in September to 2.6% in October before climbing to 2.7% in November. Core CPI, which excludes volatile food and energy prices, has been holding steady, with a year-over-year change of 3.3% from September to November.

Jerome Powell, chair of the Fed, said at The New York Times' DealBook Conference on December 4 that "we're in a very good place with the economy," but inflation is still not quite where the central bank wants it to be.

"The labor market is better, and the downside risks appear to be less in the labor market, growth is definitely stronger than we thought, and inflation is coming a little higher," Powell said. "So the good news is that we can afford to be a little more cautious as we try to find neutral."

Slower job growth and higher unemployment may add fuel to the argument for continuing to cut, while a tighter-than-expected labor market could lead the central bank to pause while waiting to see if wage growth and inflation speed up.

"I don't think there's that much cause for concern in the labor market data that would lead to them suspending their plan to cut," Julia Pollak, the chief economist at ZipRecruiter, told Business Insider.

Pollak said the quits rate, the latest reading of which was 2.1% in October, is "consistent with a non-inflationary labor market" and that "wage growth at 4% over the year should be sustainable given current productivity growth." Cory Stahle, an economist at the Indeed Hiring Lab, said the US economy continues to add jobs above population growth and has low unemployment.

The unemployment rate increased from 4.1% to 4.2% in November. The three-month average job gain in November was around 173,000, lower than early 2024 but still strong.

"There are still many reasons to be optimistic about the labor market, but also you don't, as a Federal Reserve policymaker, you don't want to wait until things start looking bad to react to that because by then, you might be too late," Stahle said.

The interest rate outlook for 2025 is a bit more uncertain. President-elect Donald Trump has already posed broad tariff threats on key trading partners with the US, including China, Canada, and Mexico. If he implements those tariffs, consumers would likely face higher prices on impacted goods. The Fed could respond to inflationary trade pressures by once again raising interest rates.

However, Powell has so far declined to comment on any policy changes the Fed would consider in response to Trump's tariff threats, saying during the DealBook conference that too much about what Trump might do with tariffs is unknown.

"We can't really start making policy on that at this time. That is something that lies well into the future. We have to let this play out," Powell said, emphasizing that the Fed is making decisions about what's happening in the economy now and not six months from now.

Still, some economists expect 2025 to be another strong year for the economy. Gregory Daco, the chief economist at EY, said that the US "remains on a solid growth trajectory supported by healthy employment and income growth, robust consumer spending, and strong productivity momentum that is helping tame inflationary pressures."

"We expect these positive dynamics will carry into 2025 allowing the Fed to pursue gradual, but cautious, policy recalibration," Daco said in written commentary.

• The government lost billions of dollars to fraud and improper payments last year.
• Both Musk and Ramaswamy have indicated they'll crack down on fraud through DOGE.
• Some experts told BI they're optimistic about action on fraud, but the DOGE leaders have to be willing to invest in the issue.

Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy have an opportunity to take on fraud in government programs once President-elect Donald Trump takes office.

Musk and Ramaswamy are tasked with leading the new Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, which seeks to reduce government waste and slash spending. Musk set a goal of cutting $2 trillion in annual outlays.

One of Musk and Ramaswamy's aims for DOGE could lead to a relatively early win with bipartisan support: eliminating fraud in federal programs like Medicare. In a recent interview, Ramaswamy told CNBC that "the dirty little secret is that many of those entitlement dollars aren't even going to people who they were supposed to be going to in the first place."

"There are hundreds of billions of dollars of savings to extract" through basic fraud prevention measures, he said.

Musk shared that sentiment, posting on X in November: "The sheer magnitude & audacity of government fraud is mind-blowing!"

Data from the Government Accountability Office showed that government agencies have made about $2.7 trillion in improper payments since 2003, and in fiscal year 2023, the GAO estimated agencies made $236 billion in improper payments. Notably, those improper payments include other categories than intentional fraud, like administrative errors, Orice Williams Brown, the GAO's chief operating officer, said in a September testimony to Congress.

"While all fraudulent payments are considered improper, not all improper payments are due to fraud," Brown said.

The top impacted agencies were Medicare and Medicaid, which the GAO said had $51 billion and $50 billion in improper payments, respectively, followed by pandemic programs, including the Paycheck Protection Program.

Experts told Business Insider that there's potential for DOGE to make progress on the issue if they focus on effective solutions like system modernization and improved data analysis, an area where Ramaswamy and Musk could leverage their Silicon Valley tech experience.

Both fraud and improper payments have been difficult for the government to address because of "outdated technology and a limited focus on program integrity," Linda Miller, cofounder of the Program Integrity Alliance — a group that focuses on fraud prevention in the government — told BI.

"You need to use advanced technology and data in order to really move the needle," Miller said. "And the government is not using advanced technology and data to solve this problem."

Jetson Leder-Luis, an assistant professor at Boston University and researcher on government fraud, told BI that DOGE could pursue "a lot of low-hanging fruit ideas" to combat fraud in big industries like healthcare.

"I think DOGE has the opportunity to make big strides on fraud," Leder-Luis said, adding that if they boost enforcement funding and create enhanced data pipelines, "they have a major opportunity to save tens of billions of dollars."

The Trump transition team did not immediately respond to a request for comment from BI.

How government programs make way for fraud

The government has been unable to implement widescale fraud intervention in recent decades because of a lack of resources and staff to investigate fraud, and a failure to modernize data and technology systems, according to Miller and Leder-Luis.

The GAO found that the government's annual financial losses from fraud were between $233 billion and $521 billion, based on data from fiscal years 2018 through 2022.

Miller pointed to the pandemic as the "perfect storm" for fraud, with the Paycheck Protection Program and disaster loan programs as key examples. Miller said that all that aid being available, coupled with limited oversight at the government level during a national emergency, made it easier for fraud to go undetected; some of the programs allowed individuals to self-certify their loan applications, paving the way for misrepresentations.

"The lack of modernization of our digital technology at the state government level was a real hindrance to fraud prevention during the pandemic," Leder-Luis said.

There have been a number of instances where individuals attempt, and sometimes succeed, to game the system and score welfare benefits that they're not entitled to. But, Miller said, the bigger concern is beyond the individual circumstances; it's the "large-scale fraud schemes" that have taken millions of dollars from the government. For example, the FBI opened an investigation into a scheme that Medicare officials said defrauded the program out of $3 billion after some companies billed the program for catheters patients never requested or used.

Lawmakers and the Department of Justice have worked to take action over the past years to address fraud, including with the federal Pandemic Response Accountability Committee that oversaw pandemic-era programs. Still, Miller said that while agencies are focused on getting benefits to the beneficiary, there still isn't enough attention on ensuring benefits are going to the right person.

"That's the kind of thing that I think really angers Americans," Miller said. "You wonder, 'What are your tax dollars going to if they're not stopping that kind of fraud?'"

Where DOGE can play a role

Miller said she expects DOGE to look for "quick wins" soon after Trump takes office. These could include modernizing IT systems and investing more resources into fraud detection. A critical point DOGE will have to contend with is that cracking down on the cost of fraud would require some upfront investments.

"It can be very helpful to have a private sector lens come in and look at this," Miller said, which is why Musk and Ramaswamy's backgrounds could be useful in introducing new technology to government systems. However, she said, the two DOGE leaders have to be willing to invest in new fraud detection systems because, even amid their goals to slash spending, modernizing technology is not going to be free.

The GAO's Brown also outlined recommendations for federal agencies to better prevent fraud, including using external data from third parties to verify information Americans provide on loan and insurance applications.

With Republicans soon holding control of both Congress and the White House, DOGE's recommendations to Trump and lawmakers would likely see an easier path to passage. Addressing fraud has also seen Democratic support; Rep. Jamie Raskin introduced the Government Spending Oversight Committee Act in April, which would give federal inspectors general tools to combat fraud across major funding bills.

To be sure, some lawmakers and experts are skeptical of DOGE's approach. The US spent $6.75 trillion in fiscal year 2024, data from the Treasury Department showed, and it wouldn't be as simple as the DOGE leaders have said to ax that spending, lawyers told BI.

While administrative law requires a lengthy process to rescind regulations in federal agencies, Musk and Ramaswamy previously said they would recommend a list of regulations that Trump could "immediately pause." Some lawyers previously said the process is a lot more complicated, and the DOGE leaders would likely face legal hurdles if they pursued that route.

Musk and Ramaswamy also aren't the first to suggest cuts to government spending. Former President Ronald Reagan's Grace Commission, aimed at eliminating waste and inefficiency in the federal government, eliminated $22 billion in social welfare programs that ended up being offset by his tax cuts and defense spending.

Still, Leder-Luis said, what DOGE determines as "waste" is up for interpretation, whereas fraud is illegal, and there's support across the aisle to take that on.

"If we lose $50 billion a year to fraud in just the healthcare system alone, that's ultimately paid for by us," Leder-Luis said. "There are so many things that people want the government to be able to pay for that we all think are good and valuable, like better roads and schools. And when we say, 'I'm sorry, we can't afford that,' well, we are affording healthcare fraud instead."

• The CFPB finalized a rule that allows banks to cap overdraft fees at $5 or set the fee at an amount that covers losses.
• The rule, which will take effect in October 2025, is projected to save Americans $5 billion annually, or $225 per household.
• The CFPB previously found that banks were charging Americans unnecessary overdraft fees.

Americans who spend more than they have in their bank accounts won't be burdened with hefty fees come October next year.

On Thursday, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau announced that it finalized a rule that would limit overdraft fees at the bank. Overdraft fees are charged when customers make a withdrawal that results in a negative account balance. However, the CFPB found that some banks charged higher fees than they needed to cover their losses, leaving consumers in a financial bind.

The new rule updates federal regulations for banks with more than $10 billion in assets. It provides those banks with options for lowering overdraft fees, including capping them at $5. For banks that choose to offer overdraft as a service for their customers, the rule allows banks to set their fee at an amount that covers costs and losses. If banks do want to keep making profits off of overdraft fees, they'll have to disclose the terms of it like they do with credit cards and other loans.

These changes are expected to save Americans up to $5 billion each year, or $225 per household, the CFPB said.

"For far too long, the largest banks have exploited a legal loophole that has drained billions of dollars from Americans' deposit accounts," CFPB Director Rohit Chopra said in a statement. "The CFPB is cracking down on these excessive junk fees and requiring big banks to come clean about the interest rate they're charging on overdraft loans."

Lower-earning Americans are disproportionately impacted by overdraft fees, per a previous report from the CFPB. The agency found that around a third of households with income below $65,000 were charged with an overdraft or a non-sufficient fee, compared to just 10% of consumers in households earning over $175,000. Americans of color and those without a college degree were also more likely to live in households affected by those fees.

The CFPB's finalization of the overdraft rule comes as the future of the agency is unclear. President-elect Donald Trump tapped Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy to lead the new Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, which aims to get rid of government waste. The two DOGE leaders said they would accomplish that goal, in part, by eliminating some federal agencies, including the CFPB.

"Delete CFPB," Musk wrote in a late November post on X. "There are too many duplicative regulatory agencies."

Chopra responded to Musk's remarks during an MSNBC interview on December 7, saying that getting rid of the CFPB would be "mayhem" and "begging for a financial crisis."

"I don't understand why people would want financial crime," Chopra said, "and if they say it's duplicative, who else will do it?"

Have you paid overdraft fees or struggled with banking fees? Contact these reporters at [email protected] and [email protected].

• Sen. Elizabeth Warren led over 20 colleagues in requesting the CFPB and FTC investigate student-loan company Navient.
• They said they're concerned that Navient might be improperly denying defrauded borrowers debt relief.
• Navient said it's committed to getting relief to borrowers, but the discharge process is still in its early stages.

A group of Democratic lawmakers said that a major student-loan company is denying some student-loan borrowers relief that they might qualify for.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren led over 20 of her Democratic colleagues, including Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Sen. Ron Wyden, in sending a letter Wednesday to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and the Federal Trade Commission urging an investigation into the student-loan company Navient.

In the letter, viewed exclusively by Business Insider, the lawmakers wrote that Navient's process to cancel student loans for borrowers who said their schools defrauded them is "flawed, convoluted, and opaque," and it may have resulted in borrowers being "improperly" denied relief they qualified for.

A process known as the borrower defense to repayment allows borrowers with federal student loans to apply for debt cancellation if they believe their schools defrauded them. If approved, the government would wipe out their balances.

However, borrowers with private loans held by Navient cannot access the federal process. Instead, they can request a school misconduct application from Navient, and Navient would then decide whether to approve it.

The company previously said it's committed to addressing all "valid" misconduct claims.

The issue, the lawmakers wrote, is that Navient has denied relief for the majority of borrowers who applied. Navient wrote to Warren and her colleagues in a September letter, viewed by BI, that the company services about 65,000 borrowers who attended for-profit schools. As of September, Navient has sent 4,233 borrowers a school-misconduct discharge application, and 1,801 borrowers have submitted applications. Of the 1,061 applications Navient fully reviewed, 238 borrowers have been approved for relief, and 823 have been denied.

Navient wrote to the lawmakers that borrowers' applications are "carefully reviewed" by a legal team to determine eligibility for debt cancellation, and to date, it has approved over $8 million in relief. Still, the lawmakers said that the denials do not contain sufficient explanations, "leaving a fraction of Navient's borrowers who attended predatory, for-profit colleges with the relief that they deserve."

BI previously spoke to some borrowers who have attempted to navigate Navient's school misconduct application process. Nick Eucker, 38, said he received an application from Navient, and after submitting 200 pages worth of paperwork in support of his claim he was defrauded, Navient denied his application. The only reasoning he was provided was: "You do not meet the requirements for discharge based on misconduct by your school."

A Navient spokesperson previously said that the discharge process is still in its early stages, and the company expects more borrowers to see relief as it rolls out.

Still, the lawmakers said that Navient has the authority to cancel the loans of impacted borrowers without requiring a lengthy application process.

"Navient should cancel all of the private fraudulent debts for borrowers who have been harmed by its misconduct," they wrote, "all of whom the company is able to identify without an application."

• Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy said a SCOTUS ruling on federal regulations will help them cut spending through DOGE.
• Some legal experts said it could actually restrict some of DOGE's aims.
• That's because, under the new legal framework, it will be more difficult to change interpretations of an existing rule.

The Supreme Court might not help Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy's spending cut goals as much as they might think.

President-elect Donald Trump tapped Musk and Ramaswamy to lead a new Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, aimed at reducing government waste. Since then, both have said a recent Supreme Court decision that restricts the ability of federal agencies to enact regulations would empower their plans to reduce head count at those agencies and cut unauthorized government programs.

This summer, the Supreme Court overturned the Chevron doctrine, which was established in 1984 and allowed federal agencies to interpret ambiguously worded laws while writing regulations as long as they did not counter Congress' language. Instead, courts themselves are obligated to resolve those ambiguities, rather than executive-branch agency experts.

Ramaswamy, a former GOP presidential candidate, wrote in a December 1 post on X that overturning Chevron "paves the way for not a slight but a drastic reduction in the scope of the federal regulatory state. It's coming." Musk responded to the post, saying: "We are going to use this ruling to gut the federal government."

Some legal experts said that's likely not the case, telling Business Insider that the Supreme Court's overturning of Chevron could actually constrain DOGE because it takes away an agency's power to interpret rules and make decisions independently.

Gillian Metzger, a constitutional law professor at Columbia Law School, told Business Insider that Musk and Ramaswamy's argument is "somewhat puzzling" because the Chevron decision "is about pulling back on executive and agency power."

"Chevron deference gave an agency room to change its interpretation of a statute, provided the statute was ambiguous, and the agency reasonably offered a permissible interpretation," Metzger said. "Without that precedent, it's going to be harder for them to change interpretations of statutes in ways that justify repealing regulations."

Still, Republican control of Congress and the White House could mean that DOGE's goals have a better chance of being implemented with lawmaker support.

Musk, Ramaswamy, and the Trump transition team did not immediately respond to a request for comment from BI.

Holes in Musk and Ramaswamy's argument

The Supreme Court overturned the Chevron doctrine in June 2024 in a ruling on the case Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo. The case was brought on by a group of fisheries that disagreed with the National Marine Fisheries Service's interpretation of a law.

Nicholas Bagley, an administrative law professor at the University of Michigan, wrote in The Atlantic that following the ruling, "an agency that has already adopted the soundest interpretation of a law can't change its mind."

"If the agency were to try to adopt a new reading of the law—perhaps one that DOGE prefers—and to use that to justify rescinding the rule, the courts would stop the agency," Bagley wrote. "Saying that Loper Bright gives DOGE flexibility is about as sensible as saying that handcuffs help when throwing a baseball."

The Administrative Procedure Act, a federal statute that outlines how agencies must enact and revoke regulations, would also complicate matters. Musk and Ramaswamy wrote in The Wall Street Journal that DOGE would offer Trump a list of regulations they recommend rescinding, and Trump could then "immediately pause the enforcement of those regulations and initiate the process for review and rescission." They wrote that doing so would "liberate" Americans and businesses from complying with regulations Congress never passed.

However, to actually rescind a regulation, the APA requires a lengthy rulemaking process that includes seeking public comment and providing justification for the reasoning to rescind a rule. The Biden administration went through that process to craft its second student-loan forgiveness plan after the Supreme Court struck down the first one. Metzger said that rescinding a rule would require agency workers with expertise in the area to help conduct that analysis, something that would be difficult if DOGE fulfills its aim of cutting the federal workforce.

Cary Coglianese, a law professor at the University of Pennsylvania, said he could see why Musk and Ramaswamy are depending on Chevron's overruling to help them slash regulations. If DOGE begins the process of rescinding existing federal regulations, there is likely to be litigation, and Coglianese said that the two DOGE leaders might be banking on courts looking at a regulation afresh and deciding that "the rule was too adventurous and acting well beyond their statutory authority."

Still, Coglianese said, that won't be easy to do — an agency has to provide extensive justification for implementing a new rule, and Musk and Ramaswamy would then be tasked with proving why the original justifications should be undone.

"There's a wild card about how much courts will be willing to reopen old precedents that were decided on Chevron grounds," Coglianese said. "They're banking on some ability to kind of be able to revisit some old statutory interpretations. It's not clear that the Supreme Court had that in mind when it overruled Chevron."

How Congress can advance DOGE's goals

Recent Supreme Court rulings might not help DOGE achieve its goals, but a Republican trifecta in Congress would. Since many of the changes Musk and Ramaswamy are seeking to make are unlikely to be accomplished by executive power alone, Congress would need to approve legislation to enact those changes.

Already, a bipartisan group of lawmakers is on board with advancing some of DOGE's spending cut proposals. Rep. Jared Moskowitz recently became the first Democratic lawmaker to officially join the DOGE caucus alongside dozens of Republicans, saying in a December 3 statement, "I believe that streamlining government processes and reducing ineffective government spending should not be a partisan issue."

Moskowitz pointed to the Department of Homeland Security as a specific agency for which he would support investigating spending cuts. Rep. Ro Khanna, another Democratic lawmaker, wrote in a December 5 post on X that he's ready to work with DOGE to "slash waste" in the Department of Defense, and Sen. Bernie Sanders recently told BI that Musk "is absolutely right" to call for defense spending cuts.

Data from the Treasury Department shows that the US spent $6.75 trillion in fiscal year 2024, with the highest amounts of spending coming from the Department of Health and Human Services, the Social Security Administration, and the Treasury Department. National defense spending also ranked high on the list, coming in at $874 billion.

With a glimmer of bipartisan support emerging for some of DOGE's goals, spending cuts could be facilitated through legislation. Musk and Ramaswamy met with lawmakers on Capitol Hill on December 5, during which GOP Sen. Joni Ernst presented a proposal to enact existing legislation to cut spending by cracking down on teleworking and getting rid of unused federal office space.

Sen. Marsha Blackburn also posted on X that she will be introducing legislation — the DOGE Act — that "will freeze federal hiring, begin the process to relocate agencies out of the D.C. swamp, and establish a merit-based salary system for the federal workforce."

Both Metzger and Coglianese said DOGE's proposals could happen through legislation, and the assumption that Musk and Ramaswamy can act on spending cuts alone — using Chevron as a backup — will likely face legal hurdles.

"If you just came along and said, 'We've got a new sheriff in town, a new president, and we don't like that rule,' that's not enough," Coglianese said. "You've got to be able to essentially rebut all that prior cases and explain why, in the face of all that you said just a couple of years ago, now, you want to get rid of a rule. That's not easy to do."

• Democratic lawmakers urged Biden to cancel student debt for defrauded borrowers before Trump takes office.
• Some borrower defense applications are still pending, and lawmakers are pushing for prompt relief.
• Biden has canceled student debt for over 1 million borrowers defrauded by their schools.

A group of Democratic lawmakers want President Joe Biden to quickly process student-debt cancellation applications for thousands of borrowers before it's too late.

On Wednesday, 75 Democratic lawmakers, led by Sens. Dick Durbin and Ed Markey and Rep. Maxine Waters, sent a letter to Education Sec. Miguel Cardona urging him to discharge unprocessed borrower defense applications, which are applications student-loan borrowers can submit if they believe they were defrauded by the school they attended. If approved, the loans they took out to attend that school would be discharged.

With President-elect Donald Trump taking office in under two months, the lawmakers said debt relief would become a lot more uncertain under his leadership.

"We're here today to demand that the Department of Education deliver on President Biden's commitment to debt relief and process all outstanding borrower defense relier before President Trump slams the door shut on borrowers on January 20," Markey said during a Wednesday press conference. "Borrowers who attended fraudulent schools and have struggled with debt for years or even decades cannot afford to wait any longer."

The lawmakers urged Biden during their press conference to cancel the loans of borrowers who applied for borrower defense in the next 50 days. In their letter, they added that the relief should include the thousands of borrowers already approved for relief who are still waiting for their balances to be wiped out. The lawmakers also wrote that the department should use its authority to enact group discharges for borrowers who attended schools "with documented histories of predatory practices," along with processing any remaining applications.

Democratic Rep. Bobby Scott also urged the Education Department in late November to approve student-debt relief applications not just for borrower defense but for Public Service Loan Forgiveness. During his first term, Trump proposed eliminating the program, which cancels any remaining debt for public sector workers after 10 years of qualifying payments.

An Education Department spokesperson told Business Insider that the department "remains committed to getting borrowers whose colleges took advantage of them all the relief they are entitled without further action on their part."

The spokesperson said that the department paused payments for borrowers with approved discharges and recommended that borrowers with questions on the status of their applications call the borrower defense hotline at 1-855-279-6207.

Biden's Education Department has canceled student debt for nearly 5 million borrowers over the past years, including $28.7 billion for over 1.6 million borrowers who were defrauded by their schools. However, thousands of borrowers are still waiting for their borrower defense applications to be processed, and time is running out.

Durbin said on the Senate floor on Monday that it's "critical" Biden discharge those borrowers' loans "as quickly as possible" because, under Trump's first term, his Education Department ran up a backlog of borrower defense claims, leaving impacted borrowers waiting years for relief.

"History shows that a second Trump Administration is likely to do everything in its power to prevent these students from receiving relief again," Durbin said on Monday. "But our nation's students, who are simply trying to better their lives deserve better."

Trump has not yet provided details on how he will approach student-loan forgiveness. However, some higher education experts previously told Business Insider that relief would likely not be his priority. Preston Cooper, a senior fellow at the conservative-leaning American Enterprise Institute, said that Trump would likely "take a bit more of a skeptical attitude" with borrower defense applications because the Education Department can determine if a borrower qualifies.

"If it's a loan cancellation program that leaves a lot more discretion up to the Department of Education, we could certainly see some major swings in policy," Cooper said.

• Donald Trump's latest tariff threat is to levy 100% duties on goods from the nine BRICS countries.
• He framed the threat as a bargaining chip, warning BRICS against competing with the US dollar.
• The US imported billions of dollars of goods from BRICS in 2023, including apparel and electronics.

President-elect Donald Trump's latest trade threat on nine countries could affect key US imports, risking price increases if the tariffs are implemented.

In a Saturday post on Truth Social, Trump targeted the BRICS group, which comprises nine countries: Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa, Ethiopia, Egypt, Iran, and the United Arab Emirates. All have pushed to curb the global dominance of the US dollar. He wrote that he would impose a 100% tariff on those countries' goods unless they committed to not creating another currency that competes with the dollar.

"There is no chance that the BRICS will replace the U.S. Dollar in International Trade, and any Country that tries should wave goodbye to America," Trump wrote.

Business Insider looked at the top goods the US imports from BRICS nations, including medicine, apparel, and electronics. While Trump appears to be using the tariff threats as a negotiating tool and could choose not to implement them at the scale he's proposing, the top imports from the targeted countries could see prices increase even with smaller tariffs.

Census Bureau trade data showed that in 2023, the BRICS nations together accounted for about $578 billion in US imports. China was responsible for the lion's share of that trade, with about $427 billion.

In 2023, the US imported $66.7 billion in cellphones and other household goods from China, $37.4 billion in computers, and $32 billion in toys, games, and sporting goods.

The US imported $151 billion in goods from the remaining eight BRICS nations, including over $11 billion in pharmaceutical preparations, followed by nearly $9 billion in gem diamonds, $6.3 billion in crude oil, and $6.1 billion in cotton apparel and household goods. India accounted for much of the imports from BRICS nations other than China.

Trump is targeting this group because some BRICS leaders have previously suggested acting to reduce their countries' reliance on the US dollar. Last year, Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva proposed creating a common currency among the BRICS nations.

The tariff threat on BRICS came just days after Trump said he would impose a 25% tariff on imports from Mexico and Canada that would remain in effect "until such time as Drugs, in particular Fentanyl, and all Illegal Aliens stop this Invasion of our Country!" He also warned of a 10% tariff on imports from China on top of any additional tariffs put in place on the country.

Russia has already responded to Trump's tariff threat. The Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov told reporters on Monday that if the US used "economic force to compel countries to use the dollar," it would empower countries to shift to other currencies for international trade.

Some companies, including Walmart and Columbia Sportswear, have already said they are preparing to increase prices should Trump implement tariffs on key trading partners.

The Trump team did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the impact of Trump's tariff threats on prices. Trump has previously said tariffs will not hurt Americans, misleadingly calling them "a tax on another country" (tariffs imposed by the US are paid by US importers).

During Trump's first term, he threatened tariffs against Mexico as a response to illegal immigration over the southern US border but later withdrew the plan. Sen. Bill Hagerty told NBC News on Sunday that trade had long been used as a "strategic tool," and he said he supported Trump using tariffs as leverage to achieve his priorities.

"We need to take a very hard look at countries that don't have our best interests at heart, countries that are allowing our borders to be violated," Hagerty said, "and use those tariffs as a tool to achieve our ends."

• President-elect Donald Trump is unlikely to continue many of Biden's student-debt relief efforts.
• Borrowers are still waiting for a final court decision on the SAVE student-loan repayment plan.
• Even if the plan survives the courts, Trump and GOP lawmakers could take steps to rein in relief.

During his two terms as president, Joe Biden has used various programs to cancel $175 billion in student debt for nearly 5 million borrowers. Those efforts will likely fizzle out over the next four years.

Two of Biden's key debt-relief initiatives are tied up in court: his SAVE income-driven repayment plan, intended to make student-loan payments cheaper for borrowers, and his broader loan forgiveness plan, set to benefit over 30 million borrowers.

Millions of federal borrowers remain in limbo as they wait for court decisions, and even if the plans do survive the courts, President-elect Donald Trump is unlikely to prioritize either the broad or the incremental relief efforts that Biden planned to implement.

"The Biden administration has taken a stance of, 'We want to try and forgive as much debt as possible through various different programs,'" Preston Cooper, a senior fellow at the conservative-leaning American Enterprise Institute, told Business Insider. "And to put it mildly, we're not going to see that same attitude under the Trump administration."

Trump has offered minimal detail on his student loan plans once he takes office. However, he has criticized broad student-loan forgiveness and ran up backlogs processing student-debt cancellation applications for key programs during his first term. Some higher education experts said borrowers can expect targeted relief and cheaper payments through SAVE to cease under Trump, and GOP control over Congress and the White House could enable that to happen quicker.

Jared Bass, the senior vice president for education at the left-leaning Center for American Progress, told BI that Trump's administration "will not be as kind to student-loan borrowers."

"I think it'll be rolling back a lot of the progress that we saw for borrowers and borrower protections," Bass said.

While Trump's team did not comment on future plans for debt relief, Trump called Biden's student-loan forgiveness "vile" during a June campaign rally and said that the relief "is not even legal."

The fate of cheaper payments under Biden's SAVE plan

Biden's SAVE plan lowered monthly payments for many borrowers based on their income and set them on a quicker path to relief. It has been blocked since July, following legal challenges from a group of GOP-led states.

8 million enrolled borrowers have been on an interest-free forbearance as they wait for a final court decision, and Cooper said that even if SAVE does prevail in federal court, Trump could work to eliminate the plan.

"It looks probably more likely than not to be struck down in courts, but even if it's not, it's likely that the Trump administration would move to try and reverse that through regulation," Cooper said.

Borrowers would likely lose the lower monthly payments they were receiving under SAVE if Trump eliminates the program, Bass said.

To get rid of SAVE, Trump's administration would have to undergo the negotiated rulemaking process, which takes time and would not happen immediately, and borrowers would likely be put back on other existing income-driven repayment plans. With Republicans holding a majority over the House and Senate, it's possible that lawmakers would also introduce legislation to rein in loan cancellation plans like SAVE.

That could include the College Cost Reduction Act, introduced by GOP Rep. Virginia Foxx in January. This bill would constrain the Education Department's ability to create new repayment plans by narrowing repayment options to a 10-year "mortgage-style" plan and an income-driven repayment plan.

"Student-loan debt is skyrocketing, and completion rates are plummeting. There's bipartisan agreement that lasting reforms are needed to correct course," Foxx previously told BI.

Uncertainty around public service loan forgiveness and relief for defrauded borrowers

Two other of Biden's major relief efforts have been improvements to Public Service Loan Forgiveness, or PSLF, which forgives student debt for government and nonprofit workers after 10 years of qualifying payments, and borrower defense, which forgives debt for borrowers who were defrauded by the schools they attended.

Trump proposed eliminating PSLF during his first term but doing so would require congressional approval, and there has not yet been sufficient support among lawmakers to get rid of the program. However, Cooper said it's possible that Trump's administration could "take a bit more of a skeptical attitude" with borrower defense applications because the Education Department determines if a borrower faced fraud and meets the qualifications for relief.

"I think that if a loan cancellation program is set out clearly in law, the administration will have to implement that faithfully," Cooper said. "If it's a loan cancellation program that leaves a lot more discretion up to the Department of Education, we could certainly see some major swings in policy."

Rep. Bobby Scott, the top Democrat on the House education committee, urged Biden's Education Department in a November letter to follow through on its loan discharges for borrowers deemed eligible for relief before Trump takes office.

"As the Administration winds down its work, I am deeply concerned about the future and whether much of this progress will be undone, ultimately harming student borrowers, particularly those who have already been promised debt relief through Borrower Defense and through Public Service Loan Forgiveness," Scott wrote.

Trump could also choose not to carry out Biden's broader relief plans, including one that aims to provide relief to categories of borrowers, including those whose balances have grown due to unpaid interest, along with a separate proposal to provide relief to borrowers experiencing financial hardship.

• The College Board found that student-loan borrowing is decreasing while grant aid is increasing.
• It comes as colleges are facing enrollment declines and questions over the value of a degree.
• Education experts told BI these shifts could force colleges to change the way they charge students.

You may not have noticed that the cost of college is quietly going down.

That's because sticker prices at public colleges haven't kept up with inflation, and schools are offering more grant aid, bringing the average real cost down. Student loan borrowing has also decreased, showing how new students are less reliant on loans.

"It's really something that's never happened before, so that's pretty remarkable," Jennifer Ma, a researcher at The College Board, which reported these findings, told Business Insider.

Still, steep college costs remain a barrier for many seeking a higher education. Students are increasingly sensitive to taking out loans, and with many questioning the value of higher education, it's forcing colleges to consider whether they can still afford to raise tuition, even with a looming enrollment cliff and volatile state funding. It could shift the way tuition prices are set in years to come.

"For colleges, I think they're really up against those tough public perceptions right now of cost is up, and value is down," Michelle Dimino, the director of the centrist think-tank Third Way Education, told BI. "And so they're going to still be in a bind for a while figuring out, 'How do we mitigate that?'"

Student loan aversion and enrollment declines

Over 40 million Americans have student debt, and while President Joe Biden has taken steps to improve some programs to make the loans easier to pay off, high interest rates can leave many struggling to pay off their balances for decades. This is a big reason many younger Americans are leaning toward financing options that do not include student loans, like grants, or forgoing college altogether.

A 22-year-old previously told BI that avoiding debt was a key factor in her decision to skip college.

"I have no student loans, like so many of my friends are in $100,000 in debt and student loans just to get a job that pays $60,000 a year," she said.

The reluctance to accumulate debt could factor into the College Board's finding that student-loan borrowing has decreased.

"Students are feeling more nervous and more skeptical about taking out loans to go to college," Dimino said, adding that as a result, colleges should be prepared to respond to students' price sensitives, especially with looming enrollment challenges.

The enrollment cliff is something colleges cannot control. The number of high school graduates is expected to decline in the coming years because of birth rate declines, meaning fewer students could seek to enroll in a postsecondary institution. Data from the Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education found that the number of high school graduates should peak in 2025 at 3.9 million, with a projected decline to 3.5 million by 2037.

Kimberly Dancy, associate director of research and policy at the Institute for Higher Education Policy, told BI that the declines in student borrowing could already be a sign of lower enrollment. She added that the students who are enrolling today might have less financial need than "students who were enrolling 10 to 15 years ago might've seen" due to the availability of aid like grants and scholarships.

Specifically, per the College Board, the maximum Pell Grant award for low-income students increased to $7,395 in 2023-24 from $6,895 in 2022-23 before adjusting for inflation due to a spending bill Biden signed into law. On top of that, institutional grants — or grants provided by colleges — to undergraduates increased by 30% between 2013-14 and 2023-24. Additionally, institutional grant aid for all students rose by $19.6 billion over the same timeframe, accounting for 52% of all grant aid in the 2023-24 school year.

With federal aid being volatile, institutions focusing more on grant aid could be a sign that colleges are responding to affordability concerns and contributing to net college price declines.

"Institutions will really have to grapple with if they do see a decline in state appropriations, maybe they can't raise tuition in the way they did in the past," Dimino said.

What's at stake for colleges

Over the course of the pandemic, colleges got government funds to help keep them afloat. Those funds have now run out, meaning colleges are subject to the volatility of the state budget funding cycle — and higher education is usually on the funding chopping block.

Jennifer Delaney, a professor in the School of Education at Berkeley, told BI that a main factor as to why higher education often doesn't get the funding it needs is because "institutions have figured out that students and families are more reliable at paying their bills than the state is." However, that type of thinking can make it difficult for colleges to best serve their students when they do not have reliable funding.

"The mission for colleges is advancing the human condition and advancing knowledge, and these are very long timeframe missions and goals, yet they're working within either annual or biannual budgeting cycles," Delaney said.

The conversation on the value of higher education could also be weighing on state's decisions to boost funding for colleges, leading some officials to think that "maybe it's not as worthwhile to invest in the sector," Delaney added.

Since state funding shifts, there are steps colleges can take to make higher education more affordable for its students. Dancy said the availability of institutional aid is a good first step, "using grants in ways that help them both attract students, to encourage them to enroll in their institutions and also as a tool for retention and to support degree completion for those students over the course of their education," she said.

To be sure, Dancy said that even with the increases in grant aid, there is still the issue of unmet need, which she defined as "a really substantial gap between what many students can afford and what they are asked to pay to enroll in higher education."

That's where the federal government can play a role. The left-leaning think tank Center for American Progress released recommendations for the government to boost college affordability, including strengthening the Pell Grant, implementing proposals to make college free for two years, and fully funding community colleges.

However, it's unclear where federal investment for higher education will sit under President-elect Donald Trump, placing the focus on colleges to consider ways to make a four-year degree affordable.

"Earning a college credential is still a worthwhile investment for many students," Dancy said. "And so addressing affordability concerns on the front end is a really critical way to ensure that that opportunity is available to more students."

• Donald Trump's new DOGE commission, tasked with cutting spending, has floated laying off federal workers.
• Government employees said they were preparing by networking and freshening their résumés.
• Amid the concerns with DOGE, some employees said there could be benefits to its aims.

Federal employees are reporting mixed feelings about President-elect Donald Trump's new Department of Government Efficiency and its ideas to cut costs by laying off workers and enforcing return-to-office mandates.

Some are worried, some are optimistic, and most are considering their other career options, 10 people who spoke with Business Insider said. Most asked for anonymity for fear of professional repercussions.

"We're just workers. We work in a nonpartisan way," one Department of Health and Human Services employee said, adding that they were nervous, especially because they recently bought a home. "It kind of feels like we're being villainized."

On the other hand, Jesus Soriano, who's been a program director at the National Science Foundation for 13 years and is president of the agency's American Federation of Government Employees union, said that while employees were scared, there were "reasons for optimism with DOGE."

Trump said his picks to lead the unofficial commission, Tesla CEO Elon Musk and the former GOP presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy, "are technologists."

"They have — both of them in their own fields — translated science into products that have tremendous impact on the public and that contribute to America being a preeminent powerhouse," he said.

Musk is the CEO of Tesla, SpaceX, and other various companies, and Ramaswamy started a tech-focused pharmaceutical company called Roivant Sciences.

In the wake of the DOGE Commission, many government workers said they were updating their résumés, networking more, or assessing new career options — regardless of their political beliefs.

"Everyone is putting their ducks in a row," a Department of Housing and Urban Development administrative worker of 10 years who worked under Trump's first term told BI. "You can't be lackadaisical, regardless that the government may take forever to do something. You better be one step ahead at all times."

While it's still unclear how exactly DOGE would cut government spending, Musk and Ramaswamy have pledged to eliminate some government agencies, which could mean laying off thousands of federal workers, and compel others who have been working from home to return to the office.

The federal government is the largest employer in the US, paying more than 2 million civilian workers. The Departments of Veterans Affairs, Homeland Security, and Defense are among the top employers, with workers earning average salaries near $100,000. Just under half of all workers across 24 agencies were telework-eligible as of May 2024, according to an Office of Management and Budget report.

"Requiring federal employees to come to the office five days a week would result in a wave of voluntary terminations that we welcome: If federal employees don't want to show up, American taxpayers shouldn't pay them for the Covid-era privilege of staying home," Musk and Ramaswamy wrote about their cost-cutting plans in a recent op-ed in The Wall Street Journal.

Brian Hughes, a Trump-Vance transition spokesperson, told BI the administration "will have a place for people serving in government who are committed to defending the rights of the American people, putting America first, and ensuring the best use of working men and women's tax dollars." He didn't offer any details on cuts.

Soriano, the National Science Foundation program director, said government workers were "still scared." He said five colleagues he'd talked to were actively seeking new jobs or opting to retire.

Increased efficiency is a welcomed idea. In-office mandates, not so much.

Trimming government spending and improving efficiency is an idea often discussed on both sides of the political spectrum.

President Ronald Reagan pursued a similar goal with the Grace Commission, a team of 160 private-sector executives who proposed more than 2,000 cost-cutting measures. President Bill Clinton also attempted to reduce federal spending and improve government efficiency with the National Performance Review, led by federal employees.

The efforts had mixed results. Many proposals from the Grace Commission that relied on congressional acts didn't end up happening, while executive orders were successful in reducing the head count of federal workers. Clinton's panel similarly succeeded in cutting 300,000 federal workers but managed to get only a quarter of proposals that required legislative action through Congress.

An operations manager at the US Postal Service who has worked in the department for 27 years told BI every company had inefficiencies, and "that's what we all strive to decrease."

He has concerns, however, about people stepping in to make suggestions for the Postal Service without having "tribal knowledge" of the department.

"If you're just going to be appointed to this type of commission or committee with no knowledge of what exactly the Postal Service does, then that could potentially be a problem," he said.

DOGE's intent to eliminate remote work is also a concern for some workers. The HUD employee, who'd been working remotely, said return-to-office enforcement would "absolutely" be enough to cause them to resign. They're preparing for layoffs under DOGE by looking at other employment opportunities, and they said their colleagues at HUD were taking similar steps.

Joyce Howell, an attorney at the Environmental Protection Agency — who's been at the agency for more than 31 years and serves as executive vice president of its AFGE union — said the incoming administration had stoked concern about layoffs at the EPA and fears that its mission could be compromised.

"We have town halls once a month, and we've actually broken our Zoom account in terms of the number of people attending," she said of union meetings.

Musk and Ramaswamy wrote in the Journal op-ed that the commission would target more than $500 billion in what they called unauthorized government spending. They said federal employees who were laid off would be offered early retirement. At a town hall in October, Musk said he would consider giving laid-off workers up to two years' severance.

An employee at the Food and Drug Administration said it wasn't that easy: "We're here to support a mission. We have families to feed, and it's not as easy as just quitting our jobs," the FDA employee said.

"We're just normal, everyday people — we're being portrayed as inefficient, lazy people," they added. "It feels like they're coming for us just for their own agenda, not realizing that we're the backbone of the federal government."

Another federal-government lifer said many workers like them — people who'd been there for years — were nervous they might be the first to go. The career tenure of a median federal government worker was 6.5 years in 2024, according to Bureau of Labor Statistics data, well above the median 3.5 years private workers have spent in their roles.

One senior official at the Commerce Department said they anticipated a civil-servant brain drain. "The scientists are the most concerned," the official said, with those in climate, meteorology, and environmental science particularly worried.

The Department of Education has meanwhile been singled out as an entire agency that could be on the chopping block.

Sheria Smith, the president of the AFGE union at the Department of Education and a civil rights attorney at the agency, said department elimination was "on the lower end of concerns" because it would take time and need to go through Congress.

Rather, being turned into a "Schedule F" workforce, which allows government agencies to reclassify workers and remove certain protections that make them easier to fire, could mean employees who aren't "aligned with the executive wholly" could be laid off based on performance.

And given the widespread denigration of the Education Department and return-to-office threats, people are most likely looking for other work. "I'd be surprised if they weren't," Smith said.

Are you a federal worker willing to share your story? Contact these reporters at [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], and [email protected].

• President-elect Donald Trump is expanding his plans for tariffs on Mexico, China, and Canada.
• The US imports key goods from them that may increase in price, like electronics, oil, and gas.
• Trump's tariff plans could face legal issues, and he may choose not to implement them.

President-elect Donald Trump's newly expanded proposal to increase tariffs on the US's three largest trading partners could raise prices on various goods Americans rely on.

Business Insider looked at what the US imports the most from Mexico, Canada, and China to determine the products most likely to increase in price if Trump's plans come to pass.

The biggest categories are oil, electronics, and vehicles.

On Monday night, Trump posted on his Truth Social platform that on his first day in office, he would "sign all necessary documents" to impose a 25% tariff on goods imported from Mexico and Canada. He also threatened a 10% tariff on imports from China "above any additional" tariffs on that country.

While the feasibility and legality of Trump's proposal are still unknown, if implemented, the proposed tariffs could affect a wide variety of goods Americans use daily. The Census Bureau reported that in 2023, the US imported about $1.3 trillion in goods from China, Mexico, and Canada combined.

From Canada, the top 2023 imports included over $92 billion worth of crude oil, about $34 billion in passenger cars, and almost $9 billion in natural gas.

The US imported over $65 billion worth of car parts from Mexico in 2023, along with about $26 billion in computers, nearly $20 billion in crude oil, and almost $14 billion in medicinal equipment.

China, meanwhile, is a major supplier of electronics to the US. The census data showed that in 2023, the US imported nearly $67 billion in cellphones and other household goods from China, over $37 billion in computers, and more than $32 billion in games, toys, and sporting goods.

Some companies have already been preparing to increase prices as a result of Trump's tariff plans on the campaign trail. Walmart CFO John David Rainey told CNBC on November 19 that price hikes are likely on the horizon if Trump implements his tariffs: "We never want to raise prices. Our model is everyday low prices. But there probably will be cases where prices will go up for consumers."

This is the most detailed tariff plan Trump has released to date. On the campaign trail, he did not detail tariffs on Canada and Mexico — he proposed a 60% tariff on all imports from China, along with a 10% to 20% tariff on goods imported from anywhere else.

Trump appears to be using this round of tariff threats to push for changes in migration and drug policy in the targeted nations. "This Tariff will remain in effect until such time as Drugs, in particular Fentanyl, and all Illegal Aliens stop this Invasion of our Country!" Trump wrote of the Mexico and Canada tariffs.

Some political leaders in Canada responded to Trump's threat on Monday night. François Legault, the premier of Quebec, wrote in a post on X that Trump's plan posed a huge risk to Quebec's and Canada's economies. Per a translation from X, he added: "We must do everything possible to avoid 25% tariffs on all products exported to the United States."

Additionally, Trump's plan could spark legal issues. Arturo Sarukhán, a former Mexican ambassador to the US, wrote in a post on X that the tariffs would violate the US-Mexico-Canada agreement, a free-trade agreement negotiated by Trump in his first term that went into effect in July 2020.

Companies and economists have said that Trump's tariff plans would increase consumer prices. BI previously reported that Trump's broad tariff proposals were likely to increase prices across the board, from clothes and footwear to computers and video games.

Trump has denied that would be the case. "I am going to put tariffs on other countries coming into our country, and that has nothing to do with taxes to us. That is a tax on another country," Trump said in an August speech.

The tariffs implemented during Trump's first term did not significantly influence inflation, but his proposals for his second term are much broader and could have a larger impact on prices if implemented.

At this point, however, Trump's proposals could still change. During his first term in 2019, Trump announced new tariffs on Mexico with the aim of strengthening the border, but following criticism from lawmakers — including some Republicans — he withdrew the plan.