Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

GOP Blocks Senate Debate On Dem Student Loan Bill

Posted by Soulskill on from the can't-even-agree-to-disagree dept.

TheGift73 writes with this quote from an AP report: "Senate Republicans blocked a Democratic bill Tuesday to preserve low interest rates for millions of college students' loans, as the two parties engaged in election-year choreography aimed at showing each is the better protector of families in today's rugged economy. The 52-45 vote to begin debating the legislation fell eight votes short of the 60 needed to proceed and stalled work on an effort both parties expect will ultimately produce a compromise, probably soon. For now, each side is happy to use the stalemate to snipe at the other with campaign-ready talking points while they are gridlocked over how to cover the $6 billion cost."

20 of 834 comments (clear)

  1. Obama knows how to play politics if anything. by GoodNewsJimDotCom · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It is funny how many bills he tries to bluff through Congress. This and the millionaires tax are something the republicans are going to torpedo, but in the process, they make republicans look like they hate the small guy. Both parties are against the small guy, but public portrayal of Democrats helping the poor is the old school image that could help them in today's economy too.

    --
    God spoke to me
    1. Re:Obama knows how to play politics if anything. by jellie · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Your logic is retarded. This was a provision that would remove tax loopholes on the wealthy to pay for the funding of the federal Stafford loans program (who was, incidentally, a Republican). These are tax loopholes that even the Republicans opposed! How does this make the Democrats "hate the small guy"?

      I don't know if Slashdot loves repeating the "both parties are the same, both parties are stupid" mantra, but really, at least make a coherent argument when doing so. You're just like Mitt Romney, trying to rewrite history.

    2. Re:Obama knows how to play politics if anything. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      My grad loans are at 8.5%. These interest rate cuts don't help me one bit. But I have to pay for them with my taxes, in addition to paying off my own loans.

      So, just to keep score:

      I have to pay to subsidize benefits for younger people that I didn't get.
      AND
      I have to pay to subsidize social security and medicare, neither of which I will ever see, because they are both projected to go broke before I ever collect a cent, and fixing them is a political third rail.

    3. Re:Obama knows how to play politics if anything. by DJRumpy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Of the two I prefer the dem bill.

      From the House passed Republican bill:

      Rates on popular student loans would be barred from doubling as scheduled on July 1 under Republican-authored legislation that the House of Representatives passed Friday – but the change would be funded by slashing money from a fund for disease prevention and public health.

      From the Democrat bill:

      Republicans oppose the Democratic plan to pay for the bill by forcing high-earning stockholders in some privately owned corporations and professional practices to pay additional Social Security and Medicare payroll taxes. Even if it passed the Senate, it would have no chance of emerging from the Republican-controlled House.

      What I see here are those who have already reaped the benefits of an education, and who can certainly afford a minimal increase in their taxes assist those trying to better themselves.

      Every GOP sponsored bill has been slash and burn to 'spare' the wealthy from shouldering a burden in this recession, when they are the ones most able to afford it. While poor families are trying to figure out how to eat for the week, the rich would have to decide whether to buy the Rolls, or the Mercedes. It's a fair comparison. The wealth gap between the poor and rich has never been more pronounced. The rich do not need coddling. They need to pay their dues. I'm moderately well off and pay far more than any typical millionaire in taxes, but I understand the need. Without a health lower and middle class, the economy sucks. Jobs are not created in a vacuum. You need customers and those customers are supplied by the low and middle class, not the rich.. You also need an educated workforce to compete in a global industry. If only those able to afford an education could actually get one, we will plummet even further in the global market as there are simply not enough 'rich' folk to make the workforce competitive on a global scale let alone a national scale.

    4. Re:Obama knows how to play politics if anything. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I read an interesting piece on Us politics a few days ago from a Belgian reporter living in the US. (I'm from Belgium btw) It goes something like this:

      Both parties are actively trying to get the other side to block their proposals, they do this so that their supporters get aroused and angry at that other party. When your supporters are pissed off and angry at the other guy, they will vote for you, even when your a dumbfuck that screws up a lot. They're to busy being angry at the other guy to notice.

      There was some more to do with it but that's what it came down to.
      When I read 'political' debate on slashdot, that's exactly what I'm seeing.

      This political behavior to actively try and get blocked by the other party obviously works best in a two-party system. So your hope for real change comes with a third party, not with the republocrats/demicans.

    5. Re:Obama knows how to play politics if anything. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That is an unfair argument (and shows GOP bias on your part). The current bill was only being voted on to start the debate, and the Republicans opposed it because "the Democratic plan to pay for the bill by forcing high-earning stockholders in some privately owned corporations and professional practices to pay additional Social Security and Medicare payroll taxes."

      So the GOP blocked the bill because high-earners will get increased taxes, whereas the Dems blocked the first bill you cited because the GOP wanted to pay for it by cutting Health Care to middle-income families. Frankly, the GOP choice is no choice at all.

    6. Re:Obama knows how to play politics if anything. by chrb · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I have to pay to subsidize benefits for younger people that I didn't get.

      If you provide free or subsidized education, then more young people will be educated. Better educated people generally go on to be more productive members of society, and over their lives will pay more taxes, thus funding education for the next generation. That is how the system works.

      Alternatively, you could charge young people vast sums of money for their education. This will deter many from seeking a higher education level. You will therefore end up with a larger proportion of young people having lower education levels, which tend to lead to menial jobs, more unemployment, and a reliance on benefits.

      There are plenty of countries that are willing to fund the education of their young people. In today's knowledge based global economy, it seems like a good investment. If education becomes prohibitively expensive in the U.S., then it is the U.S. economy that will suffer in the long term, and people will wonder why it is that better educated young people in places like Finland can still find jobs, when young Americans can't.

    7. Re:Obama knows how to play politics if anything. by thoth · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I see you, an Anonymous Coward, have bought into the Republican/Conservative lie - that rich people provide jobs - hook line and sinker.

      Unless you are literally the pool boy for some multimillionaire, you job *most likely* comes from MIDDLE CLASS consumer demand to make stuff that you want to buy.

      Rich people DO NOT go around investing their money into small businesses to help the common folk. That's total BS. Rich people are more likely to park their money out of the country or in hedge funds. Similarly, corporations DO NOT invest money into jobs for the hell of it. They ONLY respond to consumer demand.

      Right now, corporation profits are the highest ever in recorded history. Job growth... still slow, because of lack of demand. Supply side economics is again shown to be a failure, with actual real evidence from reality, not the imagination of some free market theorizing zealot.

      Your false d dichotomy about the economy also glosses over that rich people and corporations ARE the leeches.

    8. Re:Obama knows how to play politics if anything. by Slyfox696 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You do realize that most of the school's money is not spent on administration, right? You do realize that, and this changes from state to state, schools spend so much more money on teachers and their various benefits than they do on administrator salaries, right?

      My mother is a superintendent of a town with 5,000 people. While she's not quite to six figures yet, she's not too far off. But what people don't realize is the amount of responsibility which falls on a superintendent's shoulders. They don't see the nonsense they have to deal with, so many of them are not around to realize that when something happens at the school at 2 o'clock on a Sunday morning, the superintendent is responsible for getting up and driving to the school to take care of it. People don't realize how school funding works, how many conferences they have to go to, how many laws they are responsible for knowing in order to not break, etc. People don't know how much it costs to get to the position, how much time and energy has to be put into it, how administration works year round and is on call 24/7, even on their vacation. People don't realize how much money so many of these administrators donate from their own pocketbooks, to help various projects around the school. I know my mom, for example, has donated over a thousand dollars in one year, just for various clubs and programs around the school. She's donated user of her personal belongings for the betterment of the school. People don't realize these things, which is understandable because most people are not around administrators in a personal setting, but that doesn't make their comments any less silly when I read them.

      School administrators don't show up at 7:30 and leave at 3:30. They don't work just five days a week. They never get a chance to "be away from it all". I'm not denying there are many many public schools and public school administrators who are not good at what they do. Just like in any profession, you're going to have incompetents. It's just a fact of life. But what also is a fact of life is there are many more administrators who are hard working individuals, who do the job they do because they love kids and are willing to go through the stress, the hassle, the "never seeing family", etc. that it takes to be a school administrator.

      Most schools are accountable for their spending. Most schools have to work very hard to make sure their spending is responsible, and meets the numerous guidelines which are tied to nearly every cent that comes into the school. I would suggest you spend some more time with a responsible and hard working superintendent, and see just how much they really do. Then tell me they don't deserve what they make, and that they are not accountable for what they do.

    9. Re:Obama knows how to play politics if anything. by AngryDeuce · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Ah yes, the "you took money so we own you" argument.

      As opposed to the "Well, now that I'm rich, I don't want to pay taxes!! No No No NO NO NO NO!!!!" argument?

      These same people have the gall to bitch and cry about the "entitled". Give me a fucking break. Who told them they were entitled to a tax-free existence?

  2. Once again by Cornwallis · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The Repubs look like the losers for putting it to the little guys. The Dems look like losers for continuing to support increased spending.

    And of course we are the losers because were' stuck with both of them.

    1. Re:Once again by siddesu · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'll admit am not very knowledgeable about the intricacies of this particular law, but helping people get education is not so much "spending" as investing into the future. Not only this, we know investment in education and knowledge is one place where the gubmint has legitimate role, as the market tends to fail to allocate enough for education.

    2. Re:Once again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Please. This won't help education one bit. All it does is prevent a cut in administrative spending, which has skyrocketed in the past 20 years. Tuition has been going through the roof. Where has the money gone? It hasn't gone to professors. However, the number of new administrators has skyrocketed. The salaries of administrators have skyrocketed.

      Now, they just tell kids "don't worry about the rising tuition. See, interest rates are low."

      It's a scam. It's a bubble. The sooner we burst it, the better.

    3. Re:Once again by White+Flame · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What appears to be happening is that costs are inflating in accordance to the availability of and expectation of student loans, because hey, the kids'll have it so might as well take it. The quality of education is not increasing with all this additional tuition money being leached into the schools.

      The system needs an overhaul and costs need to be reined in. Arguing about loan interest rates on this burgeoning, inflated debt is just shuffling deck chairs on the Titanic.

    4. Re:Once again by capteutrino · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Actually, it is the government intervention that makes college expensive.If the government stops subsidizing student loans the colleges would have to cut the prices to attract students.

    5. Re:Once again by DarkOx · · Score: 5, Insightful

      helping people get education is not so much "spending" as investing into the future.

      I am sorry but you wrong on this point as are both parties at least in the context of the way they are going about it right now. The problem with going to college for most students is not obtaining credit, nor is it the interest rate on the credit even if rates were go up to a whopping 4.5% OMG. The problem is COST.

      The cost of college has risen in great excess compared to the general rate of inflation. The cause is to much credit to available and to cheap due to government loan grantee and or direct lending programs. This is exactly the same issue which resulted in the housing bubble. It is a bubble the cost is objectively to high today, outside STEM fields, many, many students will never recoup the time value adjusted cost of getting that education, in better salary or career opportunities. The only way tuition will ever go down is if students stop enrolling because they can't pay.

      If you want to fix the problem, you STOP offering loan grantees today. You have Sallie Mai start cutting the number of loans and the amounts it offers each year over a 5-7 year period so students can adjust and find other lenders. You eliminate the special bankruptcy protections student loans enjoy so families who borrow to much have a remedy. This will mean students will have to find cosigners or otherwise collateralize the debt. This will make them cost conscience again. It will no longer be a race between schools to see who can offer the fanciest athletic facility and the best food in the dining hall but who can offer the strongest academic credential at the lowest price, as it should be.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    6. Re:Once again by Lumpy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You are 100% correct. Cost of education is going up, now loan interest is going up. And the quality of the education? dropping through the floor. MY wife is finishing up a degree and she is utterly appalled at the kindergarten level of education she feels she is getting in her accounting classes and business classes. She recently told me, "I now understand why you assume that anyone with a business degree is a moron... it's because we are taught to be that way in college."

      She was told that to balance the books you only need to be within $2000.00US looking for any discrepency below that is a waste of time. Someone can embezzle a significant amount of money under those rules and not get caught. As a career accountant she is appalled at the idea of "eh close enough" these supposed experts and educators are drilling into their students heads.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  3. Student loans led to the education bubble by Kergan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If either side really wanted to offer better protection for families, they'd kill student loans altogether. This would make education prohibitively expensive at going rates, and immediately pop the education cost bubble.

    You can get better education, free or nearly free, in most of Europe, and yet the US youth just sits there, saddling itself with gazillions in student loan debt -- all of which it cannot default on, because it belongs to uncle Sam himself. Shudder...

    1. Re:Student loans led to the education bubble by Orne · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Didn't we just cover this a couple of days ago? Colleges don't face a risk of default; the loans are provided by banks and are underwritten by the federal government. Because 90% of the risk is mitigated by the gov, the colleges can raise tuition and the banks don't balk. A small % of students get in over their heads and default but that is baked into the interest rate, which used to be variable until congress messed with it in 2005. Like housing, the scheme breaks down when normal graduates can't pay the bills... Because there's no jobs.

  4. Doesn't anyone care about the country? by Grayhand · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Republicans seem to vote against anything that Democrats propose. I'm 50 and I've never seen this in my entire life. Republicans either get every single thing they want or they hold their breath until they get their way. Without compromise there is no government only gridlock. If compromise is dead how are we different from every other banana republic out there? We used to rule from the middle but now we get our choice of extremes. Either the extreme right wing get their way or they threaten to bring the country to it's knees. They only amount to at the most a third of the citizens so since when do a third of the people call themselves a majority and demand we all obey them???? I don't like the Democrats but the right wing Republicans scare the hell out of me. The right wing and rich stole half the country during Bush 42's rule and now they are demanding the rest. If the rich get their way you better get used to a system that resembles feudal England. We'll all end up working for our rich masters. Don't believe me then in 50 years I dare you to tell me I'm wrong. In the last 10 years the rich got a LOT richer and the rest of us are struggling. The Republicans call it trickle down economics but I call it pissing down my neck and calling it rain!