Not to bring down any fellow PI-ers but I just read this article today:http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/25/upsho ... 0002&abg=0
...so the Obama administration is proposing a PSLF cap of $57,000...if that goes through, then Chicago's LRAP is not quite as appealing
I get what they're trying to do over the long term but I seriously doubt capping PSLF will encourage law schools to lower their prices. It seems more likely that lawyers will be discouraged from taking on public service jobs
This isn't new--it was in a proposed budget this spring, and tons of people freaked out about it; it wound up not happening (yet). There's a good TLS thread someone could dredge up if s/he weren't as lazy as I am. I don't think it makes all LRAPs unappealing, though...just those offered by schools that aren't wealthy enough to step into the gap if the federal cap is imposed retroactively. I've asked Chicago people about this and they are emphatic that they would come up with a stopgap measure (but others should ask too!). Similarly, YHS are all in-house. I wouldn't be so confident about a poorer school like Berkeley or GULC.
It's kind of interesting from a political economy perspective, right, because PI lawyers are a pretty firm constituency for Obama, but not a particularly appealing category to your average American voter. On some level they're right, I think: We (not to mention all the big law and big medicine people who get IBR, even if not PSLF) are way less entitled to financial assistance than your average community college student, and there is a dubious ponzi scheme aspect to the whole structure of LS fees and IBR. But the article linked above does an awesome job of pointing out how warped the whole structure is, and implicitly, I think, making it clear it would be a mistake to fix it with a stopgap measure that fell too hard on PI lawyers' laps. thanks for sharing it!