During Tuesday’s presidential debate, college student Jeremy Epstein asked the first question: How can you reassure me “that I will be able to sufficiently support myself after I graduate?”

The candidates responded by talking primarily about jobs — a very necessary point of discussion.

But it’s also hard if you are being crushed by loan repayments.

On this front, the candidates were far less verbose in their responses. Republican nominee Mitt Romney limited his discussion to saying he will “make sure we keep our Pell Grant Program growing.” President Barack Obama only promised he will “make sure that student loans are available.”

But as useful as Pell Grants and low-interest-rate loans are, neither come close to addressing that the average student today graduates with about $25,000 in loans. At the very least, these numbers deserved more than a few sentences.

It’s time the candidates for federal and state offices took stronger stances on the issue of student debt. It’s also time for voters to hold their elected officials accountable for their inaction. After all, in today’s modern economy a simple high school diploma does not cut it in the job market; a college degree, while by no means guarantees a middle-class lifestyle, is practically a requirement.

So to ask students to take on $25,000 in debt without any guarantee of a job, just to get a chance at a decent place in the job market, seems a bit unreasonable — not to mention that it only heightens the hurdles lower-income Americans face when trying to secure better futures for themselves.

There are many models to consider when looking for solutions. Australia, for instance, in addition to funding an aggressive subsidy program, allows federally backed loans to be repaid based on post-college income. The plan allows students to pay for their own educations, while protecting them from unforeseen lack of employment. America doesn’t need to be so bold, but at least more sympathetic loan repayment laws would be a start.

But the blame doesn’t lie only at the federal level. States could prioritize money back to colleges. Universities could be more vigilant on cost control. Students could be more realistic about future incomes before they apply to expensive schools.

But regardless, it is critical that national candidates acknowledge that at some level, the federal government will need to intervene and fix the student loan problem. This is a problem jobs alone can’t fix.

And even if better job prospects would help the situation, we don’t have time to just wait for the job market to clear. Every year the student loan debt crisis goes unsolved is another year young graduates can’t leave their jobs — and guaranteed paychecks — to try to start new small businesses. It’s another year a 35-year-old mother needs to take a third minimum-wage job to pay for a degree that isn’t helping her job prospects. It’s another year a U.S. company can’t find a qualified worker to fill a job vacancy because a low-income high school student couldn’t afford the tuition.

The student loan crisis is today’s problem. And it’s one Romney and Obama — and Smith and Casey and Freed and Kane — need to talk about.