George Leef explains why in a recent post at See Thru Edu.

How ‘Gentle’ Repayment Terms for Student Loans Hurt Everybody

It’s just inevitable – any time the government decides to be generous with taxpayer money, interest groups will start scheming for ways to maximize their take, and politicians will start scheming to get the most political advantage they can from it.

The federal student loan program is an excellent lesson in the political dynamics at work in Uncle Sam’s vicarious generosity.

Trying to buy votes with easy student loans is every bit as objectionable as buying votes with other giveaways – Obamaphones, Food Stamps, Ex-Im Bank subsidies, and so on. It makes you see the wisdom of the Founders in trying to put strict limits on what the government would be allowed to spend money for.

Helping students pay for education is not among the enumerated powers of Congress. Unfortunately, in the 1930s, the Supreme Court tore down the intended limits on federal power by ruling that anything intended to improve “the general welfare” was permissible. That’s how we got federal student aid and a great many other Welfare State programs.

Once politicians began to see that some students were piling up huge college loan debts that they were having trouble repaying, they decided to be “generous,” allowing them to use Income-Based-Repayment (IBR). Students can choose IBR, which means that they will not have to pay more than ten percent of their discretionary income to service their loans. Furthermore, any balance that remains unpaid after 20 years is forgiven.

That seems kindly. The problem is that this policy strengthens one of the most damaging ideas loose in America these days, an idea that liberal collectivists have relied upon for decades. It’s the idea that individuals don’t have to be responsible for the consequences of their decisions.