Well, the Republicans have once again shown their true colors and it ain't the Red, White, and Blue.

They have shut down the Democrat plan to keep Federal student loans low.

The "family values" Republicans would rather have their plan in place which takes money from women's health issues such as cervical cancer screening and mammograms for poor women.

Democrats would pay for the continuance of the lower student loans by raising payroll taxes on high-earning stockholders of some privately owned corporations.

Well, Mitt, looks like you got some 'splaining to do to the college-age voters and also to their parents. Those are two big voter blocs for either party and the G'Nopers have probably lost them.

I think, but you may correct me....that this bill was opposed because of the Democrat plan to fund it....raising payroll taxes on high-earning stockholders of some privately owned corporations.

The Republicans would like debate on their own bill which FREEZES rates and and paid for by abolishing a health care fund.

"The Senate is steaming toward a showdown on a Democratic proposal to keep student loan interest rates from doubling for 7.4 million students. In a measure of how the upcoming election is driving work in Congress these days, it's a vote Democrats won't terribly mind losing - which is probably what will happen.

The Senate planned a Tuesday roll call on the plan, which would extend today's 3.4 percent interest rates on subsidized Stafford loans for another year. Without congressional action, those rates will double July 1."

"Republicans say they favor freezing student loan interest rates but oppose how Democrats would finance the $6 billion bill: by raising Social Security and Medicare payroll taxes on high-earning stock holders of some privately owned corporations.

But of course the Senate is controlled by the Dems so the alternate proposal will not be talked about. Their hope is that folks will see as you saw it which is sort of out context and not exactly TRUE.

""They know we're particularly upset about this" financing plan, Sen. Michael Enzi, R-Wyo., said as the Senate debated the bill Monday. He said Democrats hope that when Republicans oppose the bill, it will "make it look like Republicans want to raise the rates on students, and that's not true."

Senate heads toward showdown vote on student*loans* - NY Daily News

So it is politics as usual it seems, BUT NOT EXACTLY AS PRESENTED IN THIS THREAD !!!!!

I think if there is to be a discussion of an issue or proposal, we should discuss all the facts available, otherwise we are simply doing more negative advertising instead of actually having a discussion.

Maybe a good political move by the Dems, but doesnt do the country any good, does it ?

Originally Posted by buggyone

Well, the Republicans have once again shown their true colors and it ain't the Red, White, and Blue.

They have shut down the Democrat plan to keep Federal student loans low.

The "family values" Republicans would rather have their plan in place which takes money from women's health issues such as cervical cancer screening and mammograms for poor women.

Democrats would pay for the continuance of the lower student loans by raising payroll taxes on high-earning stockholders of some privately owned corporations.

Well, Mitt, looks like you got some 'splaining to do to the college-age voters and also to their parents. Those are two big voter blocs for either party and the G'Nopers have probably lost them.

Any links to this?? I actually got my Western Interstate Commission on Higher Education grant for my MA in Librarianship (loan if I did not return to Nevada to work) forgiven for work I did on improving the situation of victims/survivors of crimes through improving access to practical information. None of this work was done in Nevada but it affected every state in the US in some way or another. I did most of this work from Palm Harbor, FL as well as Minneapolis, MN and Rohnert Park, CA.

Maybe forgiveness for loans due to community work could be an option for recent college grads who cannot find work.

Originally Posted by Taltarzac725

Any links to this?? I actually got my Western Interstate Commission on Higher Education grant for my MA in Librarianship (loan if I did not return to Nevada to work) forgiven for work I did on improving the situation of victims/survivors of crimes through improving access to practical information. Done of this work was done in Nevada but it affected every state in the US in some way or another.

I pasted a link in my response and please read both sides of this !! It is pretty typical in the last few years.....someone suffers while the politicians on both sides just play a game.....I condemn both sides, but think any discussion should provide all the facts !!!!!

This pretty much sums it up on this issue...

"Both parties know full well that they will need a bipartisan pact on financing the measure. They are both motivated to strike such an agreement because in the months before this November's presidential and congressional elections, neither wants to be blamed for letting college costs grow for students and their families struggling in today's weak economy.

But before they strike a compromise — which both parties believe will happen before July 1 — both were eager to use the debate to score partisan points."

The Associated Press: GOP blocks Senate debate on Dem student loan bill

Searching for facts will sometimes prevent needless conversation. Looks like some folks on here get politically slanted feeds or something.

Bucco wrote, "I think, but you may correct me....that this bill was opposed because of the Democrat plan to fund it....raising payroll taxes on high-earning stockholders of some privately owned corporations.

The Republicans would like debate on their own bill which FREEZES rates and and paid for by abolishing a health care fund."

That is exactly what I said if you go back to my original post. The health care fund the Republicans want to abolish is the one that provides screening for cervical cancer and mammograms for poor women.

Yes, both sides want to freeze the student loan rate. The problem is where the money will come from.

Do you think it is best to take cervical cancer screening and mammograms from poor women or a few corporate fat cats who want another tax break?

Originally Posted by buggyone

Bucco wrote, "I think, but you may correct me....that this bill was opposed because of the Democrat plan to fund it....raising payroll taxes on high-earning stockholders of some privately owned corporations.

The Republicans would like debate on their own bill which FREEZES rates and and paid for by abolishing a health care fund."

That is exactly what I said if you go back to my original post. The health care fund the Republicans want to abolish is the one that provides screening for cervical cancer and mammograms for poor women.

Yes, both sides want to freeze the student loan rate. The problem is where the money will come from.

Do you think it is best to take cervical cancer screening and mammograms from poor women or a few corporate fat cats who want another tax break?

I think it sucks for both sides to use this issue for strictly political gain. You present this as if you are writing one of the negative ads...not that simple. WHY FORCE VOTE ? Not necessary and they know they will agree, but they force a vote so folks can talk like you are talking......not good for anybody

Why not just get it settled because they know it is going to happen...point of forcing a vote is what ?

Also you did NOT present that there was another proposal, and you did not present that both sides know they will settle

I have to say again to the readers: "Yes, both sides want to freeze the student loan rate. The problem is where the money will come from.

Do you think it is best to take cervical cancer screening and mammograms from poor women or a few corporate fat cats who want another tax break?"

Originally Posted by buggyone

I have to say again to the readers: "Yes, both sides want to freeze the student loan rate. The problem is where the money will come from.

Do you think it is best to take cervical cancer screening and mammograms from poor women or a few corporate fat cats who want another tax break?"

You can make that the issue if you are writing a negative ad which is how your post reads.....further investigation shows that to be the case as even the Democrats admit that a deal will be had but this is a vote they want on the record so that folks can say what you say and voila, your thread title, while untrue becomes an ad.

You have, nor do I, know where the settlement will be....The question you are presenting right now implies that there are only two alternatives and you do not know that......since we both know NOW, but didnt at the beginning of this thread that both parties are working on a compromise that they both know is coming. If you read about how Reid voted, which was against it,that tells you all you need to know...he KNOWS that leaves it open for a new vote on a compromise.

Why you left all of this detail out, I can only surmise but your question you pose now is mute....as YOU KNOW it will never come to that !

I just think that the repubs will not allow anything that makes Obama look good pass or be voted on,simple as that. As a group their mantra of Obama as a one term President, see Mitch McConnell ,overrides anything that might be good for America. The process is broken.

It would appear that the republicans are trying an old military tactic that seems to be failing.

That tactic is to get your enemies to fight amongst themselves - weakening each other so that the bystander can come by and compete against weakened enemies.

Were students going to vote Republican? How about women? Both are almost hopelessly lost to the Democrats.

It struck me that the goal might have been to try and get woman and students arguing against each other. The fly in the ointment was the funding mechanisms. By showing their "true colors" in objecting to "taxing the rich" they run the risk of looking more like puppets of an oligarchy.

Originally Posted by djplong

It would appear that the republicans are trying an old military tactic that seems to be failing.

That tactic is to get your enemies to fight amongst themselves - weakening each other so that the bystander can come by and compete against weakened enemies.

Were students going to vote Republican? How about women? Both are almost hopelessly lost to the Democrats.

It struck me that the goal might have been to try and get woman and students arguing against each other. The fly in the ointment was the funding mechanisms. By showing their "true colors" in objecting to "taxing the rich" they run the risk of looking more like puppets of an oligarchy.

Not sure I understand what you are saying. Harry Reid knows they will come to a compromise....HE KNOWS THAT....check on his vote on this bill.

Problem is that the Democrats FORCED a vote that was not even necessary.

Thus I do not understand what you are talking about. The Democrats picked a funding source that they knew would make the Republicans look bad and then FORCED a vote. AND YOU are saying the Republicans played a game....please explain...they have NO power to play any game in the senate.

This was a one way political game. The dems picked the funding, then forced a vote...ONE intent...ONE....try to make a negative ad from it.

Originally Posted by Bucco

I think it sucks for both sides to use this issue for strictly political gain. You present this as if you are writing one of the negative ads...not that simple. WHY FORCE VOTE ? Not necessary and they know they will agree, but they force a vote so folks can talk like you are talking......not good for anybody

Why not just get it settled because they know it is going to happen...point of forcing a vote is what ?

Also you did NOT present that there was another proposal, and you did not present that both sides know they will settle

Bucco, Buggy's really got a valid point this time, while you're trying to sound so impartial by criticizing both parties for politicizing this issue. But you're just trying to wiggle out of admitting the Republicans are advocating an embarrassing, indefensible position here. You're sounding like Romney, who spent the day again insisting he engineered the auto company rescue through managed bankruptcy. He HAS to manufacture some way, no matter how false, to cast doubt on what the bailout did for GM & Chrysler.

You know as well as I that an overwhelming majority of Americans favor the Democrats' student loan proposal for obvious reasons. But you have to hedge again, another one of what I've called your 'yeah buts.' Your position here is almost identical to last week's 'yeah buts' on crediting Obama with showing real leadership ability in the bin Laden incident.


And even though the campaigning has officially begun you object to the parties politicizing?!? ! That's hypocritical. For as long as I can remember, you have posted every scrap of information you could politically spin into either support for Obama opponents or in opposition to virtually anything the President has done.

ijusluvit - do you NOT think that the dems forced the vote to make the repubs look bad? politicizing issues did NOT start with an official opening to the campaign season! both parties have been politicizing ANYTHING that they can since the dems lost the house! such is the reason for the LOW ratings of this congress!!! [Congressional Favorability Ratings - Rasmussen Reports™ ; http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ...ility_ratings]

[not sure where i heard this, but isn't the fund for screening for cervical cancer and mammogram screening scheduled for a reduction under the next provisions of obamacare that kick in - and the repubs were simply moving said reduction up a bit earlier? i know i heard some tv talking bobblehead make that comment - just can't remember which one!]

Originally Posted by ijusluvit

Bucco, Buggy's really got a valid point this time, while you're trying to sound so impartial by criticizing both parties for politicizing this issue. But you're just trying to wiggle out of admitting the Republicans are advocating an embarrassing, indefensible position here. You're sounding like Romney, who spent the day again insisting he engineered the auto company rescue through managed bankruptcy. He HAS to manufacture some way, no matter how false, to cast doubt on what the bailout did for GM & Chrysler.

You know as well as I that an overwhelming majority of Americans favor the Democrats' student loan proposal for obvious reasons. But you have to hedge again, another one of what I've called your 'yeah buts.' Your position here is almost identical to last week's 'yeah buts' on crediting Obama with showing real leadership ability in the bin Laden incident.


And even though the campaigning has officially begun you object to the parties politicizing?!? ! That's hypocritical. For as long as I can remember, you have posted every scrap of information you could politically spin into either support for Obama opponents or in opposition to virtually anything the President has done.

Here are the facts...

Senate controlled by Democrats.

BOTH parties are negotiating and KNOW they will come up with a compromise.

Despite, the Democrats put up for a vote a bill that they knew would not pass with funding they knew would be the most political sensitive for the Republicans.

The leader of the senate Harry Reid votes against it because that allows him to bring it back up as he knows will occur with the compromise.

Now, what did I say wrong here ?

They now have the headline the want.....the legislation will pass in the future with funding which probably will have nothing to do with either mentioned.

SOOO...what is your point > I just do not get it. They put a bill up to vote that they knew had no chance for ONE SIMPLE reason.

What am I seeing wrong here...and I dont do "yeah buts".....the other issue you mentioned was easy..I complimented when it happened...I did not like an ad about Obama USING it and even mentioning the other candidate...thats it...very clear...no yeah buts

And I believe that njbchbum is correct that the funding used in the Republican is slated go be gone anyway, but dont see how that changes what the Dems did...smart move and you folks who drink the party kool aid buy into it.