Neoliberalism’s Newest Victims: The Assault on Public Service Workers through Student Loan Program Cuts
Student debt has become one of the most pressing issues facing public service workers in the United States, particularly those in underpaid yet vital professions like teaching, social work, and vocational rehabilitation. As a Special Education (SPED) teacher, I know firsthand the immense financial burden that comes with pursuing advanced degrees and certifications required to work in public schools. Despite these qualifications, the pay often falls woefully short, especially when compared to the cost of obtaining the necessary education. For many of us in public service, the Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF) and Income-Driven Repayment (ICR) programmes have been lifelines, making it possible to remain in these essential roles without being crushed by insurmountable debt. These programs ensure that after years of service, civil servants are not penalised for choosing careers that prioritise the public good over private profit.
However, these crucial programs are now under threat. The Trump campaign, backed by the Project 2025 agenda, seeks to dismantle both PSLF and ICR through the courts, halting the few financial protections available to public service workers like myself. Their push to eliminate these programs is a direct attack on those of us who have committed our lives to serving the most vulnerable populations. It feels as though we are being punished for choosing public service—a vital yet undervalued sector that is already stretched to breaking point. This isn’t just about budget cuts or fiscal responsibility; it’s a manifestation of the neoliberal and neocolonial ideologies that dominate political discourse, targeting low-paid workers in public sectors who lack the power to fight back. By eliminating PSLF and ICR, the government is eroding the few mechanisms that allow civil servants to survive in a system that consistently undervalues and underfunds public service.
Background: PSLF and ICR as Lifelines for Public Servants
PSLF and ICR programmes were established to offer a much-needed lifeline to individuals who dedicate their careers to serving the public, often in low-paying roles. PSLF was designed to forgive the remaining student loan debt after 10 years of public service and 120 on-time payments, allowing people like teachers, social workers, and vocational rehabilitation specialists to continue in their chosen professions without being burdened by debt for decades. ICR, on the other hand, helps manage the overwhelming monthly payments by capping them at a percentage of the borrower’s discretionary income, making it possible for those with lower salaries to repay their loans without falling into financial ruin (the majority of the world has free public college, but who’s counting).
These programs benefit a wide range of civil servants, from teachers and healthcare workers to firefighters, librarians, and legal aid attorneys. Despite their crucial roles in society, many of these workers are underpaid, especially when considering the high costs of education required to enter their fields. For example, teachers are often required to earn multiple degrees and certifications, accruing significant debt, yet their salaries are far from commensurate with their qualifications or the value they bring to their communities. The economic reality is that while these jobs are essential for the wellbeing of society, they do not come with the financial rewards seen in the private sector.
PSLF and ICR programs have been critical in bridging this gap, allowing public servants to continue doing vital work without being overwhelmed by student debt. Without these financial safety nets, many professionals would simply be unable to afford to stay in their roles, leading to shortages in key public sectors and further exacerbating existing societal inequalities.
Neoliberalism: Austerity and the Shrinking of the Public Sector
Neoliberalism, a dominant economic and political ideology since the late 20th century, prioritises privatisation, deregulation, and reducing government spending in favour of the so-called “free market.” At its core, neoliberalism seeks to minimise the role of the state, promoting the idea that private enterprises are more efficient and effective at managing services. Under this ideology, public sector spending, such as programs like PSLF and ICR, is often portrayed as wasteful, and public sector workers are framed as a financial burden on the state. Neoliberal proponents argue that the “free market” will step in to address social needs more efficiently, but this assumption has repeatedly proven flawed, especially in areas like education, healthcare, and public services where there is little profit incentive.
The attack on PSLF and ICR fits perfectly into the neoliberal agenda, where public spending is consistently slashed under the guise of fiscal responsibility. Corporate interests and neoliberal politicians have framed these programs as fiscally irresponsible, claiming that loan forgiveness is a burden on taxpayers. This line of reasoning ignores the reality that these programs were designed precisely to make essential public service jobs—like teaching, social work, and healthcare—financially viable for individuals who, without such support, would be overwhelmed by student debt. The elimination of these programs is not about efficiency or better economic management; rather, it’s about shifting resources away from public goods toward private profits.
Neoliberalism assumes that, if left to its own devices, the market will efficiently provide solutions to societal needs. However, this belief consistently fails when applied to public services, where profit margins are slim or non-existent. For instance, there is no incentive for private companies to ensure access to affordable education or public health services. When the market doesn’t provide, the government is forced to intervene, as it must with loan forgiveness programs like PSLF and ICR. Yet, under neoliberalism, even this minimal state intervention is undermined. Instead of supporting these vital programs, neoliberals work to dismantle them, perpetuating the false notion that the private sector will step in, despite evidence to the contrary.
This ideological commitment to shrinking the public sector under the guise of market efficiency is, at its core, a mechanism to enable unchecked capitalism and the accumulation of wealth by the few at the expense of the many. By attacking programs like PSLF and ICR through the courts, neoliberals reinforce a system that favours unsustainable growth and profit accumulation, whilst actively undermining the workers and public institutions that keep society functioning. It’s a cynical philosophy that masks the true goal of neoliberalism—constant capital accumulation at all costs, with no regard for the social fallout.
Neocolonialism: Exploiting the Most Vulnerable
Neocolonialism, in this context, refers to the exploitation of marginalised communities within a modern nation through policies that perpetuate inequality under the guise of economic management. Like traditional colonialism, it thrives on extracting resources from the most vulnerable populations while offering minimal support in return. In the case of PSLF and ICR, the dismantling of these programs disproportionately affects low-income workers who make up a significant portion of the public service workforce. These individuals often enter professions like teaching, social work, and healthcare not for the financial rewards, but to serve their communities, despite the immense financial sacrifices involved. Removing the financial safety nets of PSLF and ICR exacerbates the economic struggles faced by these workers, reinforcing cycles of poverty and limiting their ability to thrive.
The parallels to colonial exploitation are striking. Just as colonial powers extracted labour and resources from Indigenous populations whilst offering little in return, the dismantling of these loan forgiveness programs extracts labour from civil servants without providing them with the financial protections they need. Many public service workers come from marginalised racial, gender, and socioeconomic backgrounds, making them more vulnerable to financial hardship. By removing PSLF and ICR, the government is essentially exploiting their labour while ensuring that they remain trapped in systems of debt, unable to advance economically or socially. This perpetuates inequality, as workers from more privileged backgrounds, who can afford to take on public service roles without the burden of debt, face fewer barriers to success.
The people behind Project 2025 are aware of how popular these programs are among the public, which is why they are using the courts to undermine them. They know that dismantling PSLF and ICR would not pass the scrutiny of voters at the ballot box, so they have turned to the judiciary to push through their agenda. This backdoor attack is a clear example of how neocolonial tactics are used to sidestep democracy, forcing through policies that disproportionately harm the most vulnerable, while protecting the interests of the elite.
The Consequences of Dismantling PSLF and ICR
The dismantling of PSLF and Income-Driven Repayment ICR programmes would have devastating personal and societal consequences, particularly for civil servants who rely on these protections to manage their student debt. For those working in public service fields like teaching, social work, and healthcare, eliminating these programs would lead to crippling student debt, compounded by already low salaries. Many civil servants are required to pursue advanced degrees and certifications, accruing significant debt to enter these professions. Without the promise of debt relief through PSLF or manageable monthly payments through ICR, these professionals would face financial ruin, leading to burnout and an exodus from public service roles. This would make it nearly impossible for many to continue in their careers, with devastating effects on their personal lives and financial well-being.
On a broader scale, dismantling PSLF and ICR would create a ripple effect, causing severe shortages in critical public service sectors. For example, the teaching profession is already facing significant shortages, and removing loan forgiveness would exacerbate this crisis, particularly in underserved areas. Similarly, social services and vocational rehabilitation programs, which rely on highly trained but underpaid professionals, would suffer from reduced staffing, leading to overwhelmed systems and reduced access for vulnerable populations. These public sector roles are essential to the functioning of society, particularly for low-income communities that depend on these services for education, healthcare, and support.
Corporate interests stand to benefit significantly from the collapse of these public sector services. As the public sector shrinks, private corporations see opportunities for profit, particularly through the privatisation of services like education and healthcare. The attack on PSLF and ICR is a purposeful effort from the far-right to weaken public services, paving the way for privatisation. By eliminating government-backed loan forgiveness, the far-right seeks to force borrowers into the private loan market, knowing full well that many of the people who rely on PSLF and ICR—those in low-paying but essential public service roles—would not qualify for private loans. This further entrenches inequality, as corporate interests gain power at the expense of the public good, turning essential services into profit-generating industries and leaving the most vulnerable populations without the support they need. The attack on these programs is not just about fiscal responsibility; it’s an ideological assault on the public sector and the workers who sustain it.
Project 2025 and the Trump Campaign: A Direct Attack
Project 2025, supported by the far-right and the Trump campaign, represents a concerted effort to dismantle vital worker protections like PSLF and ICR programmes. These programs have allowed civil servants to manage their debt whilst working in low-paying but essential public service roles. The Trump-aligned agenda uses the courts as a primary vehicle for undoing these protections, recognising that public support for such programs is too strong for them to be repealed through the legislative process. This strategic move sidesteps democracy, pushing forward an agenda that undermines workers whilst advancing corporate interests.
The legal strategies being employed involve attacking the legality of expanded debt relief, such as the SAVE plan, and arguing that these policies overstep congressional intent under the Higher Education Act. Republican-led states like Missouri and Kansas have filed lawsuits, with the aim of blocking IDR programs under claims of financial harm to states that benefit from student loan collections (you read that right). These court cases serve as a broader test of whether the government can continue to offer debt relief to public service workers. In one instance, a federal appeals court in the 8th Circuit blocked key parts of the SAVE plan, affecting millions of borrowers who had already relied on the program to manage their debt. This legal manoeuvring is part of a larger authoritarian push to not only dismantle worker protections but also to erode the public sector, making way for privatisation and corporate profit.
This attack is not just a financial or legal issue; it is deeply political and reflects the absence of true political opposition in the United States. The Democratic Party, often portrayed as the left-wing alternative to the Republican Party, has largely embraced neoliberalism, creating a situation where the spectrum of political debate is narrowed to the right and the far-right. This dynamic prevents the rise of meaningful leftist movements, as the ruling class conspires to keep such movements out of mainstream politics. A clear example of this is how debate rules were changed to exclude Green Party candidate Jill Stein from participating in presidential debates. This manipulation of political structures keeps progressive voices marginalised, ensuring that real challenges to the status quo remain unheard.
The ruling class also actively suppresses grassroots movements that threaten their power. Historically, federal law enforcement has been used to crush organic Marxist or leftist movements. The assassination of Black Panther leader Fred Hampton in 1969, orchestrated by the FBI, is a glaring example of how the state will go to great lengths to eliminate any revolutionary threats to its authority. These tactics continue today, not just through direct suppression but also through more subtle legal and political mechanisms that maintain corporate and elite control over the political process. The attack on PSLF and ICR is one more facet of this broader authoritarian strategy, which aims to privatize public services, dismantle worker protections, and further entrench corporate power at the expense of the working class.
Final thoughts …
The attack on Public Service Loan Forgiveness and Income-Driven Repayment programmes fits squarely within the broader neoliberal and neocolonial agenda that seeks to dismantle public services and privatise essential sectors. Neoliberalism, with its focus on austerity, deregulation, and privatisation, treats public goods as expendable and civil servants as burdens, rather than essential to the functioning of society. By attempting to dismantle PSLF and ICR, Project 2025 and the Trump campaign aim to further reduce the role of government in supporting public sector workers, forcing them into unsustainable financial situations whilst opening the door for private lenders to profit. This is part of a larger pattern of stripping public services for the benefit of corporations and the wealthy, at the expense of society’s most vulnerable.
Neocolonialism in this context becomes a tool for maintaining control over marginalised groups, keeping them financially and socially oppressed. Workers in public service professions are often from minority and low-income backgrounds, and dismantling these programs exacerbates the already existing inequalities. The far-right vision is not just about eliminating debt relief; it’s about concentrating wealth and power in the hands of a few, accelerating our society toward the point where the game is rigged—where just one entity holds all the cards, and no one else can participate in the economy (not the government, but a mega-corporation). This mirrors the endgame in a game of Monopoly: once one player owns everything, the game is over, and there is no room left for competition or fairness. We’re rapidly approaching this moment, where corporate monopolies dominate every aspect of public life, leaving the rest of us unable to participate or thrive.
The potential aftermath of Trump and Project 2025 getting their way could result in a full reset of the American empire. The relentless focus on profit over people would eventually lead to the collapse of essential services, devastating public education, healthcare, and social support systems. As these systems crumble, a new order could emerge, but only if we collectively resist these regressive policies. Protecting public sector workers is not just about defending civil servants; it’s about ensuring that the services they provide continue to function for the public good.
The path forward must include public awareness, policy advocacy, and solidarity with the workers and communities most affected by these regressive policies. It’s critical to raise awareness about the dangers of these neoliberal tactics and support movements that resist the corporate takeover of public services. Through organised resistance and public advocacy, we can push back against the dismantling of PSLF and ICR and ensure that public service remains viable for future generations. This is a fight not just for civil servants but for the future of equitable public services and a fair society. The time to act is now, before we reach the point of no return.