Students credit cards

Credit cards for students, continued…

Sadly, Janne and her family are regularly reminded of their personal tragedy due to ongoing debt collection activities. The aggressive tactics of one particular bill collector continue to haunt her: "He called about Sean’s credit cards for students debt [a year later]. I left two messages explaining his death and where to get a copy of his death certificate. I just couldn’t believe it when I received the third phone call. . . . [This time] he insisted that I pay [Sean’s] debt. I’ll never forget [that conversation] . . . he said to me ‘Wouldn’t you want to honor his memory by paying off his debts?’ I was so angry. If I had the money, I would have paid them [earlier] and Sean might be with us today." The O’Donnells need no further reminders of their ordeal, but Chase and other credit cards for students companies still mail pre-approved credit cards for students applications in Sean’s name to their home. Worse, "the creditors still call but not as often."

To the displeasure of the credit cards for students industry, the national debate continues to intensify over the seriousness of the student debt problem and who is ultimately responsible. Criticism of the industry’s methodologically flawed research (which has been previously used to soften and systematically underestimate student credit cards for students debt) elicited a flurry of journalistic and academic investigations that confirmed many key findings of Manning’s 1999 CFA study. Significantly, the most striking feature of the ongoing furor over predatory marketing to college and high school students has been the adamant refusal of the credit cards for students industry to acknowledge publicly any culpability. In fact, industry representatives have rejected all requests to participate in live national television or radio programs that specifically address the issue of student credit cards for students debt. As CNN reporter Brooks Jackson concluded the "Headline News" story on the CFA press conference, he explained that " credit cards for students companies say most students use credit cards for students responsibly, but the representatives [of] Visa, MasterCard, [and] American Express would not go on camera to discuss this story." The following week, Visa withdrew its spokesperson from an interview on Good Morning America that included O’Donnell and Manning. A miffed Diane Sawyer curtly commented that "the credit cards for students companies, by the way, would not come on our program to talk with us [about the CFA study.]"

For the credit cards for students companies, their initial public relations strategy was to dismiss the scholarly criticism and its relevance to the public as unrepresentative of national trends and the student suicides as anecdotal anomalies. By ignoring the negative publicity, they gambled on the expectation that the public’s attention would shift during the summer to baseball pennant races and family vacations–financed by friendly credit cards for students of course. Instead, the groundswell of opposition to credit cards for students marketing and lending policies led to mounting public pressures for corrective action in the form of federal bills and legislative amendments as well as the introduction of restrictive marketing bills in at least twelve state legislatures. The most prominent federal response is HR-3142, the College credit cards for students Protection Act, which was introduced by U.S. Congresswoman Louise Slaughter (D-N.Y.) in October 1999.