How Do You Figure Out Who To Vote For? How Do You Figure Out Where Politicians Stand On Ed Snowden?

The easiest-- and laziest-- way to vote without following exactly what our political elites are doing every day, is to just vote against all Republicans and for all Democrats. It's certainly what Democratic Party leaders like Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Steve Israel, Steny Hoyer and Michael Bennet want you to be... but those are all people who I would never vote for in a million years, not even against the worst Republicans conjured up from the pit of hell. But I do follow what our political elites are doing every day.

Another way to figure out who to vote for and who to vote against would be based on an issue. Say you're a student with a Stafford Loan, for example, is a few days you may have to drop out of college because conservatives are forcing the loan rate to double. You can't just vote against all Republicans and for all Democrats. 4 Democrats, for example, voted with most Republicans to increase the rate: Jared Polis (New Dem-CO), Dan Maffei (New Dem-NY), Joe Garcia (New Dem-FL) and Scott Peters (New Dem-CA). And 8 Republicans voted against the awful bill, although most of them-- Louie Gohmert (R-TX), Tom Graves (R-GA), Marlin Stutzman (R-IN), Mo Brooks (R-AL), Vern Buchanan (R-FL) and Tom Cotton (R-AR)-- voted against it because it doesn't inflict enough pain on students. Only Walter Jones (R-NC) and Michael Grimm (R-NY) crossed the aisle to vote with the Democrats because they realized John Kline's bill was unfair and harmful to the country. Still, most Democrats proved good on this and most Republicans proved bad. That's normal.

Like in the case of raising the minimum wage. That was defeated in Congress and it was defeated by Republicans, right/ Well, yes but... there were six Democrats who hate working people as much as Republicans do and voted NO: John Barrow (Blue Dog/New Dem-GA), Jim Matheson (Blue Dog-UT), Mike McIntyre (Blue Dog/New Dem-NC), Collin Peterson (Blue Dog-MN), Kurt Schrader (Blue Dog/New Dem-OR) and Bill Owens (New Dem-NY). If raising the minimum wage is important to you, you don't want to be caught dead voting for those 6 reactionaries. Safe voting against every single Republican, though. Not even one voted to raise the minimum wage! So again, most Democrats were good, all Republicans were bad. But that isn't always the case. When it comes to trade policies, war and peace and other issues involving the Military Industrial Complex and civil liberties, the political elites move out of the partisan divide assumptions. If these are important issues for you, you can't just vote for Democrats. Tons of them-- not a handful-- as bad as Republicans.

Last April, after the CISPA vote in the House, I asked a simple question: who betrayed us? CISPA passed 288-127, 92 mostly conservative Democrats joining all but 29 Republicans. Nancy Pelosi and Grayson rallied 98 Democrats against it. Even Obama opposed it! Among the Democrats making common cause with Boehner and Cantor Thursday were many of the usual suspects, Blue Dogs and New Dems, led by Steny Hoyer, Steve Israel, Jim Himes, Allyson Schwartz and Ron Kind. So 92 bad Democrats and 98 good Democrats... a little close for comfort, isn't it? Allyson Schwartz (New Dem-PA) is running for governor of Pennsylvania now. You want to trust her? There are much better Democrats in the primary. Colleen Hanabusa (New Dem-HI), a very corrupt shill for the Military Industrial Complex, is running against progressive Senator Brian Schatz. He opposed CISPA and she was for it. There's no Republican in the equation, just one good Democrat and one very bad one. Steve Israel and Steny Hoyer were able to lead a lot of conservative freshmen and cowardly freshmen along with them as they crossed the aisle. Do you want to vote for them next year? Some, like Patrick Murphy, Scott Peters, Kyrsten Sinema and Sean Maloney, have a clear pattern across issues of always voting with the Republicans and need to be defeated. Others, like Hakeem Jeffries, Joyce Beatty, Tony Cárdenas, Marc Veasy and Lois Frankel are usually pretty good and shouldn't be judged on just one bad vote.

• Ron Barber (New Dem-AZ)
• Joyce Beatty (OH)
• Ami Bera (New Dem-CA)
• Julia Brownley (CA)
• Cheri Bustos (IL)
• Tony Cárdenas (CA)
• Tammy Duckworth (IL)
• Bill Enyart (IL)
• Bill Foster (New Dem-IL)
• Lois Frankel (FL)
• Pete Gallego (Blue Dog-TX)
• Joe Garcia (New Dem-FL)
• Steven Horsford (NV)
• Hakeem Jeffries (NY)
• Robin Kelly (IL)
• Derek Kilmer (New Dem-WA)
• Ann Kirkpatrick (AZ)
• Ann Kuster (NH)
• Michelle Lujan Grisham (NM)
• Dan Maffei (New Dem-NY)
• Sean Maloney (New Dem-NY)
• Grace Meng (NY)
• Patrick Maloney (New Dem-FL)
• Donald Payne (NJ)
• Scott Peters (New Dem-CA)
• Raul Ruiz (CA)
• Brad Schneider (New Dem-IL)
• Kyrsten Sinema (New Dem-AZ)
• Eric Swalwell (CA)
• Dina Titus (NV)
• Juan Vargas (New Dem-CA)
• Marc Veasey (TX)
• Filemon Vela (New Dem-TX)

Or you can play a mental game. Take something that matters to you and guess where your congressman would stand on it. For example, Saturday, Julian Assange, writing from the Ecuadorian Embassy in London explained how Ed Snowden's ordeal is just beginning. Congress hasn't voted on it yet. A couple dozen have spoken out against Snowden's persecution and quite a few have been screaming for his head, few as grotesquely as Peter King (R-NY) and Mike Rogers (R-MI), but lots... and on both sides of the aisle. Read Assange's letter and figure out where your congressmember would stand.

It has now been a year since I entered this embassy and sought refuge from persecution.

As a result of that decision, I have been able to work in relative safety from a US espionage investigation.

But today, Edward Snowden’s ordeal is just beginning.

Two dangerous runaway processes have taken root in the last decade, with fatal consequences for democracy.

Government secrecy has been expanding on a terrific scale.

Simultaneously, human privacy has been secretly eradicated.

A few weeks ago, Edward Snowden blew the whistle on an ongoing program-- involving the Obama administration, the intelligence community and the internet services giants-- to spy on everyone in the world.

As if by clockwork, he has been charged with espionage by the Obama administration.

The US government is spying on each and every one of us, but it is Edward Snowden who is charged with espionage for tipping us off.

It is getting to the point where the mark of international distinction and service to humanity is no longer the Nobel Peace Prize, but an espionage indictment from the US Department of Justice.

Edward Snowden is the eighth leaker to be charged with espionage under this president.

Bradley Manning’s show trial enters its fourth week on Monday.

After a litany of wrongs done to him, the US government is trying to convict him of "aiding the enemy."

The word "traitor" has been thrown around a lot in recent days.

But who is really the traitor here?

Who was it who promised a generation "hope" and "change," only to betray those promises with dismal misery and stagnation?

Who took an oath to defend the US constitution, only to feed the invisible beast of secret law devouring it alive from the inside out?

Who is it that promised to preside over The Most Transparent Administration in history, only to crush whistleblower after whistleblower with the bootheel of espionage charges?

Who combined in his executive the powers of judge, jury and executioner, and claimed the jurisdiction of the entire earth on which to exercise those powers?

Who arrogates the power to spy on the entire earth - every single one of us-- and when he is caught red handed, explains to us that "we’re going to have to make a choice."

Who is that person?

Let’s be very careful about who we call "traitor."

Edward Snowden is one of us.

Bradley Manning is one of us.

They are young, technically minded people from the generation that Barack Obama betrayed.

They are the generation that grew up on the internet, and were shaped by it.

The US government is always going to need intelligence analysts and systems administrators, and they are going to have to hire them from this generation and the ones that follow it.

One day, their generation will run the NSA, the CIA and the FBI.

This isn’t a phenomenon that is going away.

This is inevitable.

And by trying to crush these young whistleblowers with espionage charges, the US government is taking on a generation, and that is a battle it is going to lose.

This isn’t how to fix things.

The only way to fix things is this:

• Change the policies.
• Stop spying on the world.
• Eradicate secret law.
• Cease indefinite detention without trial.
• Stop assassinating people.
• Stop invading other countries and sending young Americans off to kill and be killed.
• Stop the occupations, and discontinue the secret wars.
• Stop eating the young: Edward Snowden, Barrett Brown, Jeremy Hammond, Aaron Swartz, Gottfrid Svartholm, Jacob Appelbaum, and Bradley Manning.

The charging of Edward Snowden is intended to intimidate any country that might be considering standing up for his rights.

That tactic must not be allowed to work.

The effort to find asylum for Edward Snowden must be intensified.

What brave country will stand up for him, and recognize his service to humanity?

Tell your governments to step forward.

Step forward and stand with Snowden.

Read More

In 10 Days The Republicans Will Force Student Loan Rates To Double

This week, PPP released a survey showing that Republicans-- plus 4 New Dems who voted with them (Jared Polis, Dan Maffei, Joe Garcia and multimillionaire Scott Peters)-- are way on the wrong side of public opinion when it comes to education. (Rumors have been floating that Obama's backward and overly corporate Secretary of Education, Arne Duncan, actually encouraged the 4 New Dems to cross the aisle and vote with the Republicans against the best interests of education policy-- which would be par for the course for Duncan.)

The national poll shows that an overwhelming 83% of Americans want to keep student loan rates at 3.4% or to adopt Elizabeth Warren's plan to lower them to the same 0.75% that the big banks pay. Even better, three-quarters of voters say they would be less likely to vote for their Representative if he or she voted to double rates to 6.8%, or allowed them to increase to a maximum of 8.5%, which is the Republican plan that was proposed by John Kline (R-MN) and passed with only 8 Republicans dissenting.

And so do 195 Members of Congress. 195-- that's the number of Members who have signed Joe Courtney's discharge petition that would force Boehner and Cantor, no matter how against it they are, to schedule an up-or-down vote for H.R. 1595, which prevents the rate from doubling by extending the current 3.4% rate for another two years. I don't see a single Republican on that list, although I do all 4 of the New Dems who voted for the Republican bill that world force rates to rise dramatically: Scott Peters (CA), Jared Polis (CO), Dan Maffei (NY) and Joe Garcia (FL). They need 218 signatures to get Boehner off his fat ass.

With Peters finally aboard, it looks like the whole California Democratic delegation is on this now. One of them, John Garamendi, formerly a University of California Regent as well as a Cal State Trustee, who has UC Davis in his district, warned that "If Congress fails to stop the Stafford loan rate from doubling by July 1st, it will take money out of the pockets of working families and students, including 11,000 students at UC Davis. Those stopping this vote from happening should be ashamed. We live in a country where half of the children from wealthy families complete college, but only one in ten children from the poorest families are able to get their degree. The Stafford loan is a vital lifeline for those trying to bridge the achievement gap, making the American Dream more accessible to all... If you believe like I do that college should be accessible to every qualified student, that a well-educated workforce creates a more resilient economy, then you should join me in calling on the House Republican leadership to give the Student Loan Relief Act the up-or-down vote it deserves. Education creates our greatest return on investment.”

Read More

Why Doesn't Obama Get New Dems Polis, Garcia, Maffei And Peters To Change Their Anti-Student Votes And Show The GOP He's Serious?

This college loan rate we've been writing about is a big deal. On Wednesday we pointed out the hypocrisy of the Democratic leadership in playing politics with the issue. After all, double the number of Republicans (8) joined the 190 Democrats to oppose John King's GOP rate hike bill than the 4 New Dems who crossed the aisle in the other direction to vote against students-- Jared Polis (CO), Scott Peters (CA), Joe Garcia (FL) and Dan Maffei (NY).

Early Friday, the DCCC-- which is promising huge money for Garcia's and Maffei's reelection efforts (the other two are multimillionaires)-- released ads targeting students at the University of Minnesota (John Kline), Cal State- San Bernardino (Gary Miller), Clark College (Jaime Herrera Beutler), Florida State U. (Steve Southerland) U of Illinois- Champaign-Urbana (Rodney Davis) and UNLV (Joe Heck).

Why not University of Wisconsin- Milwaukee (Paul Ryan), Why not UCSD- La Jolla (Darrell Issa?) Except for chairman Kline, these two clowns have a lot more to say about formulating and promulgating the reactionary GOP policy agenda than any of the backbenchers the DCCC is going after. And why not University of Colorado- Boulder (Polis), University of Miami (Garcia), Syracuse University (Maffei) or UCSD (where they could target Issa and New Dem Scott Peters in one ad)?

"The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee," their press release announced, "today is launching paid advertising in six college newspapers to alert students that their member of Congress is poised to allow their student loan rates to double by the end of June. The average college graduate already leaves school with $26,000 in student loan debt." College students aren't as dumb as your typical DCCC donor. How hard will it be for them to realize the hypocrisy of the DCCC chastising Republicans for voting the exact same way as 4 New Dems?

I might add that one of the New Dems tried explaining it to me but his reasoning was flawed, shot through with factual errors and the only part of his explanation worth retaining is that Hoyer decided to NOT whip the Democratic caucus on the vote! That means the whip team wasn't out talking to Members about why they need to present a sold front and listening to their feedback. Hoyer-- making mischief again... potentially very costly mischief for working families across the country. Meanwhile, Boehner is crowing how Kline's Students Pay More Act passed with a bipartisan majority. Nice.

“This should be a wakeup call for every student in America-- House Republicans are on a path to double your interest rates,” said Emily Bittner of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. “College students absolutely need to know that their representatives are about to make school more expensive, even while they’re subsidizing Big Oil companies to the tune of billions of dollars a year. For the umpteenth time, House Republicans are ignoring the needs of middle class families and standing with corporate special interests-- and we urge all these students to sign our petition to keep loan rates low.”

According to the Associated Press: “Under the GOP proposal, student loans would be reset every year and based on 10-year Treasury notes, plus an added percentage. For instance, students who receive subsidized or unsubsidized Stafford student loans would pay the Treasury rate, plus 2.5 percentage points. Using Congressional Budget Office projections, that would translate to a 5 percent interest rate on Stafford loans in 2014, but the rate would climb to 7.7 percent for loans in 2023. Stafford loan rates would be capped at 8.5 percent, while loans for parents and graduate students would have a 10.5 percent ceiling under the GOP proposal."

...In real dollars, the GOP plan would cost students and families heavily, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service. The office used the CBO projections for Treasury notes’ interest rates each year. Students who max out their subsidized Stafford loans over four years would pay $8,331 in interest payments under the Republican bill, and $3,450 if rates were kept at 3.4 percent. If rates were allowed to double in July, that amount would be $7,284 over the typical 10-year window to repay the maximum $19,000.” If the Republican plan were implemented, college graduates would pay $4,881 more in interest, compared to the current rate.

Maybe no one showed this to Joe Garcia, Jared Polis, Scott Peters and Dan Maffei? It would have been nice if Obama and the Democratic leadership all just got behind Elizabeth Warren's proposal to lower student loan rates to the same rate-- 0.75%-- that the banksters pay the Fed. But that makes too much sense for the Beltway Democrats. They have their own difficult-to-understand, cockamamie approach, better than the Republicans but not nearly as good as Warren's. Instead, Obama took to the Rose Garden Friday morning and made a speech. Here are some salient parts in a talk very much meant not just for students but for their parents and the general public.

[T]he cost of a college education... isn’t just critical for their futures, but it’s also critical for America’s future.

Over the past four and a half years, we’ve been fighting our way back from a financial crisis and an incredibly punishing recession-- the worst since the Great Depression-- and it cost millions of Americans their jobs and their homes, the sense of security that they’d spent their lives building up.

...[W]e’re seeing progress, and the economy is starting to pick up steam. The gears are starting to turn again, and we’re getting some traction. But the thing is, the way we measure our progress as a country is not just where the stock market is; it’s not just to how well the folks at the top are doing; it’s not just about the aggregate economic numbers. It’s about how much progress ordinary families are making. Are we creating ladders of opportunity for everybody who’s willing to work hard? Are we creating not only a growing economy, but also the engine that is critical to long-lasting, sustained economic growth-- and that is a rising, thriving middle class. That’s our focus. That’s what we’ve got to be concerned about every single day. That’s our North Star.

And that means there are three questions we have to ask ourselves as a nation. Number one: How do we make America a magnet for good jobs in this competitive 21st century economy? Number two: How do we make sure that our workers earn the skills and education they need to do those jobs? And number three: How do we make sure those jobs actually pay a decent wage or salary, so that people can save for retirement, send their kids to college?

Those are the questions we’ve got to be asking ourselves every single day. So we’re here today to talk about that second question. How do we make sure our workers earn the skills and education they need to do the jobs that companies are hiring for right now, and are going to keep hiring for in the future? We know that the surest path to the middle class is some form of higher education -- a four-year degree, a community college degree, an advanced degree. You’re going to need more than just a high school education to succeed in this economy.

And the young people here today, they get that. They’re working through college; maybe just graduated. And earning their degree isn’t just the best investment that they can make for their future-- it’s the best investment that they can make in America’s future.

But like a lot of young people all across the country, these students have had to take on more and more and more debt to pay for this investment. Since most of today’s college students were born, tuition and fees at public universities have more than doubled. And these days, the average student who takes out loans to pay for four years of college graduates owing more than $26,000. How many people are on track here for $26,000?

And that doesn’t just hold back our young graduates. It holds back our entire middle class, because Americans now owe more on our student loans than we do on our credit cards. And those payments can last for years, even decades, which means that young people are putting off buying their first car, or their first house-- the things that grow our economy and create new jobs. And I’ve said this before, I know this firsthand-- Michelle and I, we did not finish paying off our student loans until about nine years ago. And our student loans cost more than our mortgage. Right when we wanted to start saving for Sasha and Malia’s college education, we were still paying off our own college education.

And we were lucky. We had more resources than many. So we cannot price the middle class or folks who are willing to work hard to get into the middle class out of a college education.We can’t keep saddling young people with more and more and more debt just as they’re starting out in life.

Now, the good news is over the past four years, my administration has done a lot to address this.  Working with members of Congress, we’ve expanded student aid. We’ve reformed the student loan system. We’ve saved tens of billions of taxpayer dollars that were just going to big banks, and made sure that the money went to helping more young people afford college.

We made it easier to pay back those loans by passing a law that says you’ll only have to pay 10 percent of your monthly income towards your student-- federal student loans once you graduate. This is important to emphasize, by the way, because a lot of your peers, a lot of young people don’t know this. Under existing law that we passed, you never have to pay more than 10 percent of your income in paying back your federal student loans, which means if you want to be a teacher, you want to go into a profession that does not pay a lot of money but gives you a lot of satisfaction, you are still capable of doing that and supporting yourself.

We unveiled a new college scorecard that gives parents and students the clear, concise information that you need to shop around for a school with the best value for you. And I’ve made it clear that those colleges that don’t do enough to keep college costs down should get less taxpayer support.

So we’re doing what we can, but here’s the thing: If Congress doesn’t act by July 1st, federal student loan rates are set to double. And that means that the average student with those loans will rack up an additional $1,000 in debt. That’s like a $1,000 tax hike. I assume most of you cannot afford that. Anybody here can afford that? No.

Now, if this sounds like déjà vu all over again, that’s because it is.  We went through this last summer.  Some of you were here.  It wasn't as hot. (Laughter.) I don't think we did this event outside. (Laughter.) But we went through this. And eventually, Congress listened to all the parents and young people who said “don’t double my rate.” And because folks made their voices heard, Congress acted to keep interest rates low. But they only did it for a year and that year is almost up.

So the test here is simple. We’ve got to make sure that federal student loan rates don’t double on July 1st. Now, the House of Representatives has already passed a student loan bill, and I’m glad that they took action. But unfortunately, their bill does not meet that test. It fails to lock in low rates for students next year. That’s not smart. It eliminates safeguards for lower-income families. That’s not fair. It could actually cost a freshman starting school this fall more over the next four years than if we did nothing at all and let the interest rates double on July 1st.

So the House bill isn't smart and it's not fair. I'm glad the House is paying attention to it, but they didn't do it in the right way. So I’m asking young people to get involved and make your voices heard once again. Last year, you convinced 186 Republicans in the House and 24 Republicans in the Senate to work with Democrats to keep student loan rates low. You made something bipartisan happen in this town that is-- that's a powerful thing. You guys were able to get Democrats and Republicans to vote for something that was important.

So this year, if it looks like your representatives have changed their minds, you're going to have to call them up again or email them again or Tweet them again and ask them what happened, what changed? You're still taking out these loans. You're still facing challenges.

Remind them that we're a people who help one another earn an education, because it benefits all of us. During the Civil War, Lincoln had the foresight to set up a system of land grant colleges. At the end of World War II, we set up the GI Bill so that people like my grandfather could come back from a war and get an education. All these things created the greatest middle class on Earth.

My mom, a single mom, was able to get the support that she needed through loans and grants-- even while she was also working and raising two kids-- to get her degrees. I'm only here, Michelle is only right over there in the East Wing because we got great educations. We didn't come from privilege. And we want to make sure that the next generation has those same opportunities, because that has been good for the country as a whole.

It’s up to us now to carry forward that tradition. Higher education cannot be a luxury for a privileged few. It is an economic necessity that every family should be able to afford, every young person with dreams and ambition should be able to access. And now is not the time for us to turn back on young people. Now is not the time to slash the investments that help us grow. Now is the time to reaffirm our commitment to you and the generation that's coming behind you, and that if we work together to generate more jobs and educate more kids and open up new opportunities for everybody who’s willing to work and willing to push through those doors of opportunity, America can't be stopped.

It would be nice if President Obama picked up the phone and called the 4 New Dems who voted with the GOP against students and got them to change their minds. It could set a good example for enough wavering-- or is that quivvering?-- Republicans, to get a reasonable plan back in gear. Granted, even if Obama brings the New Dems to their senses, deranged extremist ideologues like Luke Messer (R-IN) aren't ever changing their minds. Watch:

Read More

How The DCCC Is Making Hay Of The GOP Vote To Force Up The Student Loan Rate Against Vulnerable Congressmen

Last week, the House passed John Kline's dreadful Make College Less Affordable Act, 221-198. Although only 4 conservative Democrats crossed the aisle to vote with the Republicans, 3 of the four are viewed as extremely vulnerable and are top priorities for the DCCC bad Democrat retention operation. The 4 anti-student voters were all corporately-controled New Dems, of course:

• Jared Polis (CO)
• Scott Peters (CA)
• Joe Garcia (FL)
• Dan Maffei (NY)

Polis, the richest Democrat in the House-- and in a solidly blue district-- can probably get away with almost anything and he isn't on anyone's list. He won reelection last year 56-39% and Obama took CO-02 with 57.9% to Romney's weak 39.5%. Ironically, the Democratic heartland of the district is Boulder, home to the University of Colorado, which boats 30,000 students. And Polis ran up a gigantic lead in Boulder County-- 90,448 (73%) to 26,775 (22%) for Republican Kevin Lundberg. The Republicans would need a lot of imagination to target Polis for his vote-- along with all 4 of the state's Republicans, right-wing extremists Mike Coffman, Doug Lamborn, Cory Gardner and Scott Tipton-- against reducing the interest on student loans. I guess they could make the point that the super-wealthy shouldn't be representing ordinary people because they can't usually too sharply beyond their own piles of gold and silver. But, like I said, it isn't Polis anyone is worried about. It's conservative freshman Scott Peters (San Diego), Joe Garcia (Miami) and Dan Maffei (Syracuse) who they have to worry about. Each has been voting too far right for their Democratic bases. Maffei's district is also college student heavy and he depended on college students to help him defeat crazy teabagger Ann Marie Buerkle last November. Peters, another multimillionaire incapable of representing the aspirations and dreams of ordinary working families, has plenty of college students in his district and so does Miami.

Of course none of this has stopped the DCCC from going right after the Republicans they view as among the most vulnerable-- for doing exactly what they'll have to defend Maffei, Garcia and Peters for. Over the weekend, media in Santa Clarita, Simi Valley and the Antelope Valley got this press release in regard to Buck McKeon's vote for higher student loan rates. It's reminiscent of the Buck McKen Hates Students Facebook page from last year, when he voted to take away health insurance from college students:

VOTE ALERT: Congressman McKeon Supports ‘Students Pay More Act’

Congressman Buck McKeon just joined House Republicans to approve the “Students Pay More Act,” a measure to force college students to pay more interest for their education loans. With the average college student shouldering $26,000 in debt, the Associated Press this week described how “student loan rates could steadily climb and cost students more over the long haul under the plan House Republicans are considering.”

While Congressman McKeon voted today to make student loans more expensive, he and Republicans refuse to end taxpayer subsidies to Big Oil companies that are already making record profits.

“Congressman McKeon voted today to make student loans more expensive, but heaven forbid that oil companies’ subsidies end,” said Emily Bittner of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. “Instead of solving the problem of loan rates that will double at the end of the month, Congressman McKeon and House Republicans are putting a bigger burden on the backs of future students. The simple fact is that Congressman McKeon and House Republicans would rather force students to pay more than ask oil companies to pay their fair share-- and those are the wrong priorities.”

BACKGROUND

Congressman Buck McKeon Voted To Raise Student Loans by 8.5 Percent. [H.R. 1911, Vote #183, 5/23/13]

AP: House Republican Plan Would Raise Student Loan Interest Rates Up to 8.5 Percent. According to the Associated Press: “Under the GOP proposal, student loans would be reset every year and based on 10-year Treasury notes, plus an added percentage. For instance, students who receive subsidized or unsubsidized Stafford student loans would pay the Treasury rate, plus 2.5 percentage points. Using Congressional Budget Office projections, that would translate to a 5 percent interest rate on Stafford loans in 2014, but the rate would climb to 7.7 percent for loans in 2023. Stafford loan rates would be capped at 8.5 percent, while loans for parents and graduate students would have a 10.5 percent ceiling under the GOP proposal.” [Associated Press, 5/16/13]

  • Headline: Republicans move forward with student loan plan that could mean higher rates later [Associated Press, 5/16/13]

Under the “Students Pay More” Act, Graduates Would Pay Almost $5,000 More in Student Loan Interest. The Associated Press reported: “In real dollars, the GOP plan would cost students and families heavily, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service. The office used the CBO projections for Treasury notes’ interest rates each year. Students who max out their subsidized Stafford loans over four years would pay $8,331 in interest payments under the Republican bill, and $3,450 if rates were kept at 3.4 percent. If rates were allowed to double in July, that amount would be $7,284 over the typical 10-year window to repay the maximum $19,000.” If the Republican plan were implemented, college graduates would pay $4,881 more in interest, compared to the current rate. [Associated Press, 5/16/13]

The Average College Graduate Has $26,600 in Student Loan Debt; Total National Student Loan Debt Exceeds $1.1 Trillion. According to the Washington Post: “A recent report from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau estimates that there 38 million student loan borrowers in the United States and the total debt load has passed $1.1 trillion. The Project on Student Debt has estimated that 66 percent of graduating college seniors in 2011 had some student loan debt, with an average balance of $26,600.” [Washington Post, 5/20/13]

CBO: Federal Government Turns $51 Billion Profit on Student Loans. According to the Huffington Post: “The Obama administration is forecast to turn a record $51 billion profit this year from student loan borrowers, a sum greater than the earnings of the nation's most profitable companies and roughly equal to the combined net income of the four largest U.S. banks by assets. Figures made public Tuesday by the Congressional Budget Office show that the nonpartisan agency increased its 2013 fiscal year profit forecast for the Department of Education by 43 percent to $50.6 billion from its February estimate of $35.5 billion.” [Huffington Post, 5/14/13]

AND BACHMANN

I guess you heard by now that Michele Bachmann, under investigation by the FBI for serious financial shenanigans involving campaign funds and a coverup (and brand new to term limits fandom), has decided to not run for reelection. This endless and excruciating ad below is like nothing I've ever seen before (except as part of a Saturday Night Live skit):

Read More

Republicans Led By John Kline (R-MN) Voted Down Elizabeth Warren's Plan To Lower Student Interest Rates

After watching him as a freshman senator, I never believed Obama would be a vehicle for Hope and Change. I voted for him in 2008 anyway. I couldn't force myself to do it again last November. Elizabeth Warren, on the other hand, is someone who I have actually bought into right from the start. I donated to her campaign and helped promote her cause. This week, her first proposed legislation has made me-- and thousands of others across the country who backed her-- proud. The Bank on Students Loan Fairness Act would lower student loan interest rates for one year from 3.4% to 0.75% -- the same rate the government loans money to the banks through the Federal Reserve discount window. As Senator Warren reminds us in the video above, student loan interest rates will double to 6.8% on July 1st without action.

John Tierney (D-MA) introduced a sister bill in the House. As Warren and Tierney have told their colleagues in both houses of Congress, "The biggest banks in the country-- the ones that wrecked our economy and cost millions of Americans their jobs-- pay next to nothing on their debt, while students pay nine times as much. The Bank on Students Loan Fairness Act lets students take advantage of the same low interest rates offered to banks through the Federal Reserve discount window:

• Sets Interest Rates for Government Loans to Students at the Same Level as Government Loans to Banks. The Act would provide a one-year fix to the impending interest rate hike by setting the rate for federal subsidized Stafford loans at the primary interest rate offered through the Federal Reserve discount window as of July 1, 2013.

• Funded by the Federal Reserve, Administered by the Department of Education. The Federal Reserve would make funds available to the Department of Education to make these loans. While the Federal Reserve would now provide funding, the Department of Education would continue to administer all other aspects of the federal subsidized Stafford loan program in the same manner as it currently does.

So Cantor and Boehner assigned it to John Kline's Education and Workforce Committee where they knew they could depend on the reactionary Kline to kill the bill. Thursday he called a vote and it died 23-14. Every Republican plus New Dem Jared Polis voted against it:

• John Kline (MN)
• Tom Petri (R-WI)
• Buck McKeon (R-CA)
• Joe Wilson (R-SC)
• Virginia Foxx (R-NC)
• Tom Price (R-GA)
• Kenny Marchant (R-TX)
• Duncan Hunter (R-Betty Ford Clinic)
• Phil Roe (R-TN)
• Glenn Thompson (R-PA)
• Tim Walberg (R-MI)
• Matt Salmon (R-AZ)
• Brett Guthrie (R-KY)
• Scott DesJarlais (R-TN)
• Todd Rokita (R-IN)
• Larry Bucshon (R-IN)
• Joe Heck (R-NV)
• Susan Brooks (R-IN)
• Richard Hudson (R-NC)
• Luke Messer (R-IN)
• Jared Polis (New Dem-CO)

Mike Obermueller is the Minnesota Democrat running for Kline's seat next year. MN-02 is a winnable district for Democrats-- Obama beat Romney, though just barely. Last year Obermueller got no help from the DCCC whatsoever and Kline beat him 54-46%. Kline spent $1,957,356 and Obermueller spent $705,166. This year the DCCC is promising to help. Obermueller was disappointed but not surprised by Kline's reaction to Elizabeth Warren's proposal this week:

"You either want to help students or you don’t. Senator Warren’s bill took a stand in favor of students and Congressman Kline’s decision to kill the bill shows how short sighted his thinking is.

"Making sure students can afford to go to college means a better-trained workforce that not only attracts more businesses, but ensures our country is competing globally. Making it harder for families to afford college is downright bad for the economy.

"Unfortunately, Kline chairs the committee where good bills go to die."

Distinguished Simi Valley surgeon Lee Rogers, a spokesperson for the American Diabetes Association, is deciding whether or not to run against Buck McKeon against next year. He's very enthusiastic about Elizabeth Warren's approach and spent a great deal of time speaking with students at College of the Canyons, Antelope Valley College, Cal Arts, and Cal State Northridge when he ran in 2012. When McKeon chaired the committee he was notorious for taking immense legalistic bribes from the big predatory lending institutions who ripped off students as normal business procedure. Rogers was ahead of his time when he spoke out about the issue last year, telling voters that outstanding student loan debt was over a TRILLION dollars, surpassing credit card debt and McKeon was just delighted to get his cut from the banksters and hustlers. The Republican plan, being pushed by McKeon acolytes, Kline and Foxx, which they call "market-driven," pegs the loans to 10-year Treasury notes, plus 2.5 percentage points. What market is driving that? The market for lobbyists bribing Members of Congress?

Democrats on the committee opposed the bill, saying it puts students and families at risk of paying more in the future.

"Our students and families deserve better than this bait-and-switch scheme we're voting on today," said California Representative George Miller, the senior Democrat on the committee.

"A low-income, four-year borrower enrolling in college next year would pay more interest on her student loans under the Republican proposal than she would if we took no action," he said.

The non-partisan Congressional Research Service estimates that under the Republican plan, a student who borrows the maximum amount of subsidized and unsubsidized Stafford loans over five years would pay $14,430 in interest. If rates were allowed to double on July 1, a student would pay $12,598, compared with $7,965 if rates don't double.

Read More

Republicans And Their Bankster Buddies Have A Plan To Squeeze Needy College Students

John Kline (R-MN) wants much higher loan rates for students

Just a few days shy of a year ago, there was a great deal of tumult about conservative Austerity hawks trying to double to interest rate on student loans.

President Obama begins an all-out push on Friday to get Congress to extend the low interest rate on federal student loans, White House officials said, an effort that is likely to become a heated battle along party lines. If Congress fails to act, the interest rate on the loans, which are taken out by nearly eight million students each year, will double on July 1, to 6.8 percent.

...At a time when Americans owe more on student loans than on credit cards-- student debt is topping $1 trillion for the first time-- and the Occupy movement has highlighted the rising furor over spiraling student debt, the issue has moved higher on the political agenda. But the question of what to do about the looming interest rate increase has landed deep in the chasm separating Democrats from Republicans, who accuse the president of using the issue in a fiscally irresponsible way, in an attempt to buy the youth vote.

The Congressional Budget Office has estimated that a one-year freeze on the interest rate for subsidized Stafford loans would cost $6 billion.

“Bad policy based on lofty campaign promises has put us in an untenable situation,” said John P. Kline Jr., the Minnesota Republican who is chairman of the House Committee on Education and the Workforce.

The low interest rate stemmed from the 2007 College Cost Reduction and Access Act, which reduced interest rates on subsidized Stafford loans over the following four academic years-- from 6.8 percent to the current 3.4 percent-- with the proviso that the rates would revert to 6.8 percent this July. Extending the low rate would be too costly, Mr. Kline said. “We must now choose between allowing interest rates to rise or piling billions of dollars on the backs of taxpayers,” he said. “I have serious concerns about any proposal that simply kicks the can down the road and creates more uncertainty in the long run-- which is what put us in this situation in the first place.”

Mr. Kline, who earlier this year called the interest-rate hike a “ticking time bomb set by Democrats,” said he was exploring other options in hopes of finding a solution that served borrowers and taxpayers equally well.

When the 2007 law was passed, 77 Republicans-- most of whom are still in Congress-- voted for it. But in the current climate of fractious partisanship, new legislation introduced by Representative Joe Courtney to extend the lower rate has 127 co-sponsors, all of them Democrats.

Mr. Courtney said he was hopeful that some Republican support would be forthcoming as the political stakes became more apparent.

It never got that far. Boehner and Cantor instructed Kline to kill Courtney's bill in the House Education and Workforce Committee, which he chairs. And the bill was killed, although the old rate was extended for one year-- enough time to get the Republicans through the 2012 elections. Last week Courtney reintroduced it as H.R. 1433 and it is given little chance of getting a vote on the House floor. All 87 co-sponsors are Democrats. If Congress doesn't act, rates will go from 3.4% to 6.8%. Over 7 million undergraduate students will be impacted, mostly from working class families.

I'm going to guess that contacting your congressmembers and senators and telling them that you favor keeping the rate affordable for students isn't going to do much good if your congressmember and senators are Republicans. Perhaps a more effective way of dealing with this-- if the issue seems important to you-- is to help elect progressives who believe in the policy. This morning we talked with Pennsylvania state Senator Daylin Leach who does back the policy, is running for an open congressional seat in northeast Philadelphia and has been endorsed by Blue America. And the strength of his convictions comes from a place that isn't going to be swayed by some greasy K Street lobbyists. "My single mother had very few financial resources. The only possible path for me to go to college was through student loans. The availability of these loans at reasonable rates literally changed my life. That's why I get so angry when I hear about crushing debt. If we need revenue, how about slashing corporate tax breaks rather than creating an unsustainable burden on middle class students just starting out in life?"

Read More