I’m arguing that the rate is already artificial and borrowers are paying more than they should. So increasing lender costs would not necessarily increase rates

I’m arguing that the rate is already artificial and borrowers are paying more than they should. So increasing lender costs would not necessarily increase rates since rates are set by something other than the market. When I took out student loans in 2013, I got a 6.5% rate for 25 years. It can’t be discharged and any default is guaranteed by US Department of Ed (eg, I die, or use income based repayment for 25 years and discharge the balance). So to the borrower, the “risk” is that the USG defaults. For comparison, I bought a house that year and got a 4.25% 30-year mortgage that has my house as collateral. Why would a student loan that can’t be discharged have a higher rate than a mortgage?