The Ultimate Irony: HCR vs. Student Loan Program

[fromVT]

House approves huge changes to student loan program

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/21/AR2010032103548.html?hpid=topnews

Legislation hailed by supporters as the most significant change to college student lending in a generation passed the House on Sunday night.

The student aid initiative, which House Democrats attached to their final amendments to the health-care bill, would overhaul the student loan industry, eliminating a $60 billion program that supports private student loans with federal subsidies and replacing it with government lending to students. The House amendments will now go to the Senate.

By ending the subsidies and effectively eliminating the middleman, the student loan bill would generate $61 billion in savings over 10 years, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office.

________________________________

Lesson learned:

It's OK to create a "single lender" system for college students, causing a huge business impact to the private student loan industry.

It's not OK to create a "single payer" healthcare system, because it would create a huge business impact to the private health insurance industry.

Same bill, no less.

[Nickster]

1. Student Loan industry doesn't have the lobbyist action that the insurance industry does.

[Oregone]

2. Sorta hilarious, in a sad way

Some industries just don't benefit from privatization, nor are dependent upon competition driven innovation. Students loans and bank insurance seem to fall in this category, but lordy, don't you kill grandma by taking the profit outta health insurance.

They snuck socialization in the backdoor for student lending, attached to a bill that deems the expenses, wastes, and irresponsibilities of private health insurance market as permissible for the greater good of the system.

As far as the student lending move, its right on the money and a great job (and absolutely terrifying if it couldn't have passed on its own)!

[Toots]

3. When did Republicans say it was okay to cut out the bankers?

Republicans are the Only ones saying it is not okay for the Government to provide single payer and they are also the Only ones saying it is not okay to eliminate the bankers on student loans. Who learned your so-called lesson anyway?

[laughingliberal]

8. Did I read your post correctly? Republicans are the only ones saying it's not OK to

have a single payer system? I'm sure that's not what I read cause I know there can't be anyone who missed the fact that the Democratic Senate wouldn't even offer us a Public Option.

[howaboutme]

4. Difficult to misinform on student loans

It is a straightforward issue. Getting a student loan at a lower rate is is tough to spin as being detrimental to the recipient.

Now getting government health care even if it costs much less is spinnable by claiming it won't be as good or will be rationed.

In my heart I believe that Democrats too were bought off not to push the public option, because they never pushed a simplistic comparison. They should have been asking - Would you prefer your health care being managed by an insurance company who profits more by doing less, and that takes an additional 30% off the top in the process, and has a CEO earning many millions and receives increased bonuses by cutting health care? Versus having your health care decisions made by an informed non-profit government employee whose CEO earns $400K and receives no bonus based upon cutting your benefits?

As seen with the student loans, the public has no special allegiance to the private sector if they can get more service at less cost from government.

[uberblonde]

5. Um, it didn't pass.

It was pulled at the last minute and replaced with an increase in Pell grants:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/22/education/22pell.html?src=twt&twt=nytimespolitics

[CLANG]

6. What dya mean? It passed in the reconciliation bill.

[laughingliberal]

9. I believe what the article says is the fees paid to banks will be eliminated and the money

we save will be used to increase Pell grants.

[nebenaube]

11. you didn't read the link you posted. n/t

[Frustratedlady]

7. That will help some families that already have health ins., so it's OK.

Reughs are only interested in their own pocket, and they can't stand the thought that the healthcare money might go to help "those people" who sit around doing nothing...Reagan's Welfare Queens.

They have theirs, so they aren't interested in what anyone else needs.

Now, if you're going to help my kid, that's a different story.

[laughingliberal]

10. Yeah, Reagan was pretty serious about cutting money for higher education, too

Keeping the population stupid seems to benefit Republicans.

Then again, we're busy dismantling public education for children. Maybe it's now good for both parties to have a stupid public.

But, I'm glad the provision is in the bill. Far too many can't afford college and have to take on massive debt just to start their lives.

[Zenlitened]

12. Ain't that the truth? K&R - n/t