Student Loan Purchase Programs Under the Ensuring Continued Access to Student Loans Act of 20081%

By Steve Zehngut0%

5/27/2009, 7:19:00 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 0 faulty reasoning types, including no named faulty reasoning patterns yet, with no single egregious example has been isolated yet. Analysis detected 0 faulty-reasoning hits from 185 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 0% and a BS Rank of 1% (15,604 of 15,673 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 99.60% of the article peer group.

May 27, 2009 3:19 PM ET

Click here to download a PDF copy of this report.

In May of 2008, Congress passed the Ensuring Continued Access to Student Loans Act (ECASLA) in response to concern that credit market conditions could disrupt federal student loan availability. The law gives the U.S. Department of Education temporary authority to purchase federally backed student loans made by private lenders, effectively providing a secondary market for the loans. Congress opted to leave the new purchase authority largely undefined in statute, giving the Department considerable discretion to design and administer it.

To date, the Department has created four separate loan purchase arrangements under ECASLA: a put option; a short-term purchase program; a financing arrangement; and an asset-backed commercial paper support program. This issue brief provides a detailed description of these arrangements and has been updated with new information since originally published in January 2009.

To read the full report, download the PDF at right under “related files.”

Student Loan Purchase Programs Under ECASLA 2008 (10pp, PDF)

Confirmation Bias
0%
Anchoring Bias
0%
Availability Heuristic
0%
Representativeness Heuristic
0%
Hindsight Bias
0%
Overconfidence Bias
0%
Framing Effect
0%
Loss Aversion
0%
Status Quo Bias
0%
Sunk Cost Effect
0%
Optimism Bias
0%
Pessimism Bias
0%
Negativity Bias
0%
Self-Serving Bias
0%
Fundamental Attribution Error
0%
Actor-Observer Bias
0%
In-Group Bias
0%
Out-Group Homogeneity Bias
0%
Halo Effect
0%
Horn Effect
0%
Dunning-Kruger Effect
0%
Recency Bias
0%
Primacy Effect
0%
Blind-Spot Bias
0%
Ad Hominem
0%
Straw Man
0%
Appeal to Authority
0%
False Dilemma
0%
Slippery Slope
0%
Circular Reasoning
0%
Hasty Generalization
0%
Red Herring
0%
Bandwagon
0%
Appeal to Emotion
0%
Begging the Question
0%
Post Hoc (False Cause)
0%
Tu Quoque
0%
Burden of Proof
0%
Appeal to Nature
0%
Composition/Division
0%
Anecdotal
0%
No True Scotsman
0%
Ambiguity (Equivocation)
0%
Gambler’s Fallacy
0%
Middle Ground
0%
Personal Incredulity
0%
Special Pleading
0%
Genetic Fallacy
0%
Unattributed Quote
0%
Quote-first Misdirection
0%
Biased Writer Voice
0%
Indoctrination
0%
Politically Left Leaning Bias
0%
Politically Right Leaning Bias
0%
Attempt to Sell a Product or Service
0%

185 words analyzed.

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.