Blame, Policy Feedback, and the Politics of Student Debt Relief Policy

The Forum Pub Date : 2024-07-01 DOI:10.1515/for-2024-2009
Mallory E. SoRelle, Serena Laws
{"title":"Blame, Policy Feedback, and the Politics of Student Debt Relief Policy","authors":"Mallory E. SoRelle, Serena Laws","doi":"10.1515/for-2024-2009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Less than 1 year after President Biden announced a sweeping plan to reduce – and in many cases eliminate – the student loan burden for the 46 million Americans who hold educational debt, the Supreme Court ruled the proposal unconstitutional in Biden v. Nebraska. Media accounts immediately speculated about whether the Court’s actions would spell trouble for the President’s reelection efforts, presuming that voters would punish Biden for a perceived policy failure. Despite, or perhaps because of, these concerns, the administration has continued to pursue student debt forgiveness through other means, and highlighting these efforts has been a key component of the president’s re-election strategy. Prior research suggests that Democrats, and the president in particular, stand to benefit electorally from pursuing student debt relief. But did the Supreme Court’s decision to block the president’s plan change who voters hold accountable for the problem of student loan debt? And to what extent is the issue motivating voters from different constituencies in 2024? This study leverages insights from an original survey experiment fielded in August 2023 to explore the dynamics of blame attribution for federal student debt cancellation efforts. We find that, contrary to media speculation, voters place much greater blame on the Supreme Court and congressional Republicans for the problem of student debt, while President Biden receives relatively little blame. We consider the implications of these findings for the short-term electoral politics of student debt relief policy as well as the increasingly salient politics of debt relief more broadly.","PeriodicalId":513080,"journal":{"name":"The Forum","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Forum","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/for-2024-2009","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Less than 1 year after President Biden announced a sweeping plan to reduce – and in many cases eliminate – the student loan burden for the 46 million Americans who hold educational debt, the Supreme Court ruled the proposal unconstitutional in Biden v. Nebraska. Media accounts immediately speculated about whether the Court’s actions would spell trouble for the President’s reelection efforts, presuming that voters would punish Biden for a perceived policy failure. Despite, or perhaps because of, these concerns, the administration has continued to pursue student debt forgiveness through other means, and highlighting these efforts has been a key component of the president’s re-election strategy. Prior research suggests that Democrats, and the president in particular, stand to benefit electorally from pursuing student debt relief. But did the Supreme Court’s decision to block the president’s plan change who voters hold accountable for the problem of student loan debt? And to what extent is the issue motivating voters from different constituencies in 2024? This study leverages insights from an original survey experiment fielded in August 2023 to explore the dynamics of blame attribution for federal student debt cancellation efforts. We find that, contrary to media speculation, voters place much greater blame on the Supreme Court and congressional Republicans for the problem of student debt, while President Biden receives relatively little blame. We consider the implications of these findings for the short-term electoral politics of student debt relief policy as well as the increasingly salient politics of debt relief more broadly.
指责、政策反馈以及学生债务减免政策的政治学意义
摘要 在拜登总统宣布一项旨在减轻--在许多情况下是消除--持有教育债务的 4600 万美国人的学生贷款负担的全面计划不到一年之后,最高法院在 "拜登诉内布拉斯加州 "一案中裁定该提案违宪。媒体立即猜测最高法院的这一行动是否会给总统的连任努力带来麻烦,并推测选民们会因认为拜登的政策失败而对其进行惩罚。尽管有这些顾虑,或者说正因为有这些顾虑,政府还是继续通过其他途径来争取免除学生债务,而强调这些努力也一直是总统连任战略的重要组成部分。先前的研究表明,民主党人,尤其是总统,将从学生债务减免中获益。但是,最高法院阻止总统计划的决定是否改变了选民对学生贷款债务问题的问责对象?这个问题在多大程度上激励了 2024 年不同选区的选民?本研究利用 2023 年 8 月进行的一项原创调查实验的洞察力,探讨联邦学生债务取消工作的责任归属动态。我们发现,与媒体的猜测相反,选民将学生债务问题更多地归咎于最高法院和国会共和党人,而拜登总统受到的指责相对较少。我们将探讨这些发现对学生债务减免政策的短期选举政治以及日益突出的更广泛的债务减免政治的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信