周五，众议院民主党未能推翻唐纳德·特朗普总统对一项法案的否决，该法案将逆转教育部对被盈利性大学误导的学生的贷款豁免的强硬政策。
众议院以238票赞成，173票反对的表决结果支持这项否决措施，但仍未达到提交参议院所需的三分之二多数。
这标志着教育部长贝特西·德沃斯的胜利，他的学生贷款豁免政策在国会三月份投票反对后岌岌可危。它现在仍然有效，将于7月1日生效。
国会在三月份批准的措施将恢复奥巴马政府在2016年制定的规则。这项措施是通过国会审查法案批准的，该法案允许国会在两院简单多数通过并得到总统批准的情况下推翻联邦法规。
虽然最初的措施得到了两党的支持，但只有6名共和党人投票赞成推翻否决，而172名反对。
民主党人呼吁取消该法案，称德文郡的规定使得被欺骗的学生几乎不可能获得取消贷款。他们指责她将规则堆砌成有利于盈利性大学产业的样子，该产业在特朗普政府中找到了盟友。
但是共和党人说，德文斯的规则是对奥巴马时代政策的改进，他们说奥巴马时代的政策太容易取消贷款。
“大规模贷款豁免一直是民主党的目标，而奥巴马的规则是朝着这一目标的巨大飞跃。这也忽视了纳税人的高成本，”共和党众议员弗吉尼亚·福克斯说，他是众议院教育委员会的资深共和党人。
这场争论源于一项被称为借款人还款辩护的政策，该政策允许借款人在他们的大学撒谎让他们入学的情况下取消他们的联邦学生贷款。
这项规定创立于20世纪90年代，但在科林蒂安学院和其他营利性大学倒闭后，在巴拉克·奥巴马总统的领导下得到了扩展。当局表示，他们对毕业生的成功做出了虚假的断言。
根据奥巴马时代的规定，如果有证据表明学校存在虚假陈述或违约，学生可以获得贷款豁免。在普遍存在欺诈的情况下，整个学生群体可以在一次索赔中获得贷款。
但是，在政策生效之前，DeVos暂停了这项政策，称它让贷款获得豁免变得太容易了。去年，德文斯用一项新政策取代了它，她说这项政策保护纳税人和大学免于无谓的索赔。
她的规定为索赔设定了更高的标准，要求借款人证明他们的学校故意误导他们并造成个人经济损失。它还对学生的申请设置了时间限制，给学生毕业或退学后最多三年的时间。
其他的变化包括取消团体索赔，并且DeVos终止了一项自动取消学生贷款的条款，这些学生在毕业前就读的学校已经关闭。
她的政策得到了共和党人和营利性大学产业游说者的支持，他们认为这是奥巴马政府不公平的目标。然而，民主党人和消费者权益倡导者表示，该规定剥夺了对被诈骗学生的保护。
大学入学和成功研究所周五表示，这项规定将使许多被诈骗的学生无法偿还贷款。
非营利组织的主席詹姆斯·克瓦尔说:“这项规定在经济危机和公共健康危机中为被欺骗的学生设置了路障，同时对欺骗的大学几乎不施加任何后果。”。
由于对该政策的处理和积压的贷款取消申请，德沃斯面临着民主党的尖锐批评。今年4月，德文斯表示，她将处理超过17万份索赔，作为一项诉讼和解的一部分，该诉讼指控她在重写规则时非法中止了该程序。
截至4月30日，该机构表示，在总共收到的318，000份申请中，有130，000份待处理。
DeVos单独改变了政策，只向许多学生提供部分贷款减免。只有当学生参加的项目产生的毕业生的平均收入远低于类似项目的毕业生时，她的更新才提供完全解雇。其他学生的部分贷款被取消。今年6月，消费者团体提起诉讼，对该规定提出质疑。
Democrats fail to override Trump veto on student loan policy
House Democrats on Friday failed to override President Donald Trump’s veto of a measure that would have reversed the Education Department's tough policy on loan forgiveness for students misled by for-profit colleges.
The House voted 238-173 in support of the override measure, coming up short of the two-thirds majority needed to send it to the Senate.
It marks a victory for Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, whose policy on student loan forgiveness was in jeopardy after Congress voted to reverse it in March. It now remains in place and will take effect July 1.
The measure Congress approved in March would have restored a 2016 rule created by the Obama administration. The measure was approved using the Congressional Review Act, which allows Congress to overturn federal rules with a simple majority of both chambers and approval of the president.
While the original measure had bipartisan support, just six Republicans voted in favor of overriding the veto, while 172 opposed it.
In calling for the override, Democrats said DeVos' rule made it nearly impossible for cheated students to get loans canceled. They accused her of stacking the rules in favor of the for-profit college industry, which has found an ally in the Trump administration.
But Republicans said DeVos' rule is an improvement over the Obama-era policy, which they say granted loan cancellations too easily.
“Massive loan forgiveness has long been a Democrat objective and the Obama rule was a giant leap toward that goal. One that also ignored the high cost to taxpayers,” said Rep. Virginia Foxx, R-N.C., the ranking Republican on the House education committee.
The dispute stems from a policy known as borrower defense to repayment, which allows borrowers to get their federal student loans erased if their colleges lied to get them to enroll.
The rule was created in the 1990s but was expanded under President Barack Obama after the collapse of Corinthian Colleges and other for-profit colleges that closed. Authorities said they made false claims about the success of their graduates.
Students could get loans forgiven under the Obama-era rule if there was evidence of misrepresentation or breach of contract by the college. In cases of widespread fraud, entire groups of students could get loans discharged under a single claim.
But DeVos halted the policy before it took effect, saying it made it too easy to get loans forgiven. Last year DeVos replaced it with a new policy that she said protects taxpayers and colleges from frivolous claims.
Her rule sets a higher bar for claims, requiring borrowers to prove their schools knowingly misled them and caused personal financial harm. It also sets a time limit on claims, giving students up to three years after they graduate or withdraw.
Other changes include the elimination of group claims, and DeVos ended a provision that automatically canceled loans for students who went to schools that shut down before they could graduate.
Her policy was backed by Republicans and by lobbyists for the for-profit college industry, which argues it was unfairly targeted by the Obama administration. Democrats and consumer advocates, though, say the rule strips protections for defrauded students.
The Institute for College Access and Success on Friday said the rule will leave many defrauded students stuck repaying their loans.
“The rule creates roadblocks for defrauded students in the middle of an economic and a public health crisis, while imposing next to no consequences for the deceitful colleges,” said James Kvaal, the nonprofit's president.
DeVos has faced sharp criticism from Democrats over her handling of the policy and a backlog of loan cancellation claims. In April, DeVos said she would process more than 170,000 claims as part of a settlement in a lawsuit alleging that she illegally halted the process while she rewrote the rule.
As of April 30, the agency said it has 130,000 pending claims out of 318,000 total received applications.
DeVos separately changed the policy to provide only partial loan relief to many students. Her update provides full discharges only if students attended programs that produce graduates with average earnings far below those of graduates at similar programs. Other students get portions of their loans erased. Consumer groups filed a lawsuit challenging the rule in June.
