House approves student loan bill, paid for with healthcare funds

[NNN0LHI]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/la-house-approves-student-loan-bill-20120427,0,2178901.story

By Lisa Mascaro

1:13 p.m. CDT, April 27, 2012

WASHINGTON — Setting the stage for another showdown with the Obama administration, Republicans in the House on Friday narrowly passed legislation to prevent a rate hike on student loans — to be paid for with funds from the nation's new healthcare law.

Democrats objected to raiding a public health and disease prevention fund to pay for keeping loan interest rates low, calling it an attack on women and children who benefit from the health programs.

The White House vowed to veto the bill, which is essentially dead on arrival in the Senate, where Democrats proposed a tax increase on higher-income households to fund the loan program.

“This is a politically motivated proposal and not the serious response that the problem facing America’s college students deserves,” the White House said, noting that hundreds of thousands of screenings for breast and cervical cancer are available through the health fund.

[northoftheborder]

1. Why does this student loan bill need to be "paid for"?

Won't it just be money the banks wouldn't receive with the lower interest rates? Are we going to pay the banks the difference? Doesn't make sense.

[Travis_0004]

4. The profit from student loans pays for loan forgiveness

The federal government is on the hook for student loans. This means they use some profits for their loan forgiveness program, some money to pay for defauts, and some money for pell grants.

If rates are reduced, then less income is brought into the federal government.

Also, these changes only affect government loans, not private loans, and the rate only affects subsidized loans.

[northoftheborder]

5. thanks for explanation

[Kip Humphrey]

2. We can educate our kids or we can treat our sick but we will not do both!

[DearAbby]

3. Stand your ground.

[customerserviceguy]

6. I'm beginning to wonder

if this is never going to get beyond the impasse stage. We've had a few of these confrontations during the current Congress, but they've always been averted at the last minute, with somebody blinking.

What if nobody blinks this time? It's not like the government is going to run out of money and shut down completely, or something like that. It's not going to roil the bond or the stock markets, it's not going to tip the economy into a double-dip recession or anything like that. It would be a good "trial balloon" for Repukes to see if saying no to something would hurt them in the polls, because it could easily be reversed before Election Day.

Somebody convince me that it's going to be solved by compromise before the due date.