Once more, Congress proves incapable of doing simple things. The Senate failed to overcome another painless filibuster and could not take up a bill to keep student loan interest rates low. All the Democrats voted to proceed, all the Republicans except retiring Olympia Snowe voted to obstruct. Sen. Snowe voted ‘present,’ which is not something I’ve noticed her doing before. I think it just highlights how spineless she is.
It looks like the Republicans want to let the loans get more expensive and then try to blame the Democrats and the president. This means we have to make more of an effort to point out the truth, which is that the Republicans are protecting a tax loophole that they used to find objectionable and insisting that the price of keeping student loans affordable be taken out of preventative health care. It’s pure ideology. They want to dictate to the president and they don’t care how many people get hurt as a result.
And what about St Lugar, hero of the center? Did he vote to over-ride or did he do what he always does, vote to continue the GOP obstructionism?
The guy is a useless piece of trash, honestly.
he missed the vote.
BTW, Lugar is out! lost to the teabagger
This is the wrong debate in any case. I mean, it’s so far-gone. The right debate should be, “Why do we force our kids to take out mortgages to get an education at all?”
However, realizing that we are a “center-right” country that Very Serious People keep trying to insist on the rest of us…let’s change the conversation again: why was the interest rate from 1998-2006 1.76% during school and 2.36% during repayment? Oh, right…George Bush:
Deficit Reduction Act of 2005
NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PARTIES!
what?
1.) It is wrong that in America kids are forced to take out loans which amount to mortgages to have any upward mobility.
2.) It is therefore the wrong debate to be having (“What should the fixed interest rate be for these students?) The correct debate should be: “Let’s fund the state schools and stop giving subsidies to for-profit colleges.”
3.) However, because we’re ruled by idiots and the conversation must be about an interest rate of 3.4% or 6.8%, I am suggesting that we ask why we’re having this debate about those rates at all, when the interest rates for repayment during Clinton’s second term and George Bush’s first term were 2.36% during repayment. The reason is the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 that Bush “shoved through Congress” by the skin of its teeth.
Put another way: without the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005, students like me would be paying 2.39% during repayment. A year ago we’d be paying 2.325%.
That’s not much of a difference. Unless you put the numbers wrong. Either way, the GOP is protecting the hedge-fund crowd at the expense of students.
There’s not much of a difference between 6.8% and 2.39%? That’s news to me. Or do you mean 2.39% and 2.325%? Yes, not much of a difference there. But 91 day Tbills don’t vary by that much so I’m not sure I understand your comment.
With George Bush’s Deficit Reduction Act of 2005: 6.8%
Without it: 2.39% (present day)
It all comes back to Bush.
It’s pure ideology.
Yes, and so f*ckin what? The Democratic Party as a (w)hole failed to change the rules, so now are living with the consequences. I blame them.
sure. this is all the fault of Democrats.
Of course not. But neither do they get a free ride.
Of course the Republicans care how many people get hurt as a result. As long as it’s not the 1% who are hurt in any way (and in this case, a doubled interest rate means more money for their patrons), the more people that get hurt, and the worse they’re affected, the better. Better still if it’s a constituency that leans Democratic (like students and recent students, 50% of whom are sluts anyway).
I was about to type something about this being government as practiced by second-graders, but in fact most second-graders I know are a lot more responsible and thoughtful than this.
David Brooks:
“”Running up huge deficits without fixing the underlying structure will not restore growth.”
Paul Krugman:
Paul
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/05/07/pain-without-gain/
Joe Wiesenthal says something that can’t be said enough:
The fact of the matter is that there’s no example in Europe, yet, where the bond market has rewarded austerity.
Brad Delong is an Economics professor at UC Berkeley
http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2012/05/when-are-interest-rates-expected-to-normalize.html
Meanwhile, In The Bond Market: The real interest rate on 10-year US bonds is now firmly negative. This is as clear a demonstration as you can ever expect to see that the models some allegedly authoritative figures use to analyze the economy are dead wrong; it’s also an indication that obsessing over the deficit, and actually cutting back sharply on government investment, are crazy.
First Round KO- Paul KTHUG Krugman!!
They want Obama to lose the election. They will block anything that benefits people. They don’t care how many people they harm.
I’ve honestly come to believe it goes deeper than that. The more “unworthy” people they can hurt the better it feels. That is, after all, how sociopaths get off, correct? Romney’s “I enjoy firing people who serve me” was more profoundly revealing than a mere “gaffe”.
One small but encouraging change this time around: the headlines (online anyway) seem to have dropped the “bill failed” crap and instead headline the story with something like “GOP blocks student loan bill”. Time, NYT, USA Today, even Reuters. Maybe the perps will find it just a little harder to hide this time.
How about: GOP REFUSES to vote on student loan program.
As they have done a record number of times, the Republican Senators, by their “cloture vote”, refused to vote on subjects very important to average Americans.
The big problem is the “60 vote required for passage” crap should properly be noted as Republican Obstuctionism, not what is the Constitutions intent.
Oddly enough, the affected population segment is quite capable of discerning exactly WHO the guilty parties are. But, the greatest political minds of the Republican party are out to screw them. That’s all right because if I remember correctly that demographic (college trained, 20-30) belongs lock, stock and bullets to Obama.
However, their GRANDPARENTS???? Not so much. This could be the middle of the end for Romney and the dwarfs.
Dwarf bowling anyone?
Well this grandparent can see, so don’t generalize or you fall into ageism. In my experience, age makes a big difference on social issues such as gay rights, affirmative action, and the 2nd amendment. But income level swamps age on pocketbook issues.
Wingnuts and Teabaggers are MUCH LOUDER than sensible people so you hear them much more. BTW, some of them are quite young.