It isn’t now because Republicans changed the law (at the behest of the private student loan lobby—bankers), such that in 2004, any guaranteed student loan is no longer dischargeable. What is the purpose of bankruptcy? To eliminate the debts of citizens so that they have a fresh start. To not include student loans denies the purpose of the bankruptcy laws. There is no “fresh start.” If you are against including student loans, then you should be against bankruptcy laws.
That being said, which kind of debts should be allowed to be “charged off” in bankruptcy ? Any? All? Some? None?(”not paying your debt is wrong. Period”)
What’s the alternative? We don’t really want debtors prisons, do we?
I can sympathize with the argument on huge medical bills, but IIRC, those are a very small percentage of the actual reasons for personal bankruptcies.
I agree with you. In fact, I think that there may be a Constitutional issue with the law. The Constitution gives Congress power over bankruptcy law across the US, but there must be some sort of limitation on that power. If a large segment of the population can’t discharge in BK their most significant debt, then it seems to me that defeats the who Constitutionally-enshrined concept of “fresh start” bankruptcy.