Yeah, y'all need to stop knee-jerking and actually read what the proposal is.
Alexander's proposal takes the current nine repayment schemes down to two - a standard, ten-year fixed repayment scheme (which has been around for years) and an income-based scheme using automatic repayment. Automatic payments would never exceed 10% of an individual's income, and payments are automatically cut to zero when earnings fall low enough. It would also mean those wanting income-based repayment wouldn't have to annually recertify their earnings (which is quite a bureaucratic process, and a lot of people who initially sign-up for income-based repayment forget to do it and then get locked-into the higher standard repayment rates). Researchers think that Alexander's proposal would reduce default rates.
Source: https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2019/02/19/proposal-payroll-withholding-sets-debate-student-loan-system
LOL@the bolded. This is my current job. I help process about a dozen of these applications a day. It's one of the easiest annual tasks and significantly easier than filing taxes.
The follow up sentence is also incorrect. No one gets locked into a higher pay rate. If you forget to renew yes your payment increases but you always have the option of signing up again.
Yes, thus increasing delinquency and defaults, as the standard repayment schemes are based solely on your loan balance and interest rate.
Getting more borrowers into IBR necessarily requires moving toward paycheck withholding, because the current IBR bureaucratic design can't support anything like automatic enrollment (or even a significant uptake in enrollment).
If you ignore every phone call, email and letter sent about delinquency refusing to ever sign up for IBR again, yes. And it takes a whole year of that to default. Which can be avoided at any time by taking a one month forbearance.
Your second paragraph might explain the large hiring spree at my job.
