Senate Republicans filibuster student loan bill

[ProSense]

Senate Republicans filibuster student loan bill

by Joan McCarter

Senate Republicans voted unanimously to block the Democratic bill to extend a lowered interest rate on student loans, 52-45, with one voting "present." (Sen. Reid voted no so that he can bring the vote back up at a later date.)

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid had made a very generous offer to Senate Republicans on extending the low interest rate on student loans: if they agreed to drop their filibuster of the Democratic bill, he'd give them a vote on the Republican plan. Straight up or down votes for the Senate to decide which approach it approved.

"If Republicans would stop filibustering our legislation … if they want some other way to pay for it, let's take look at it," Reid said. "Let them offer that. The stakes in this debate are too high to let partisanship get in the way."

Republicans didn't take him up on that offer, refusing to go on the record on the House bill. They say they support an extension of the 3.4 percent interest rate on federally subsidized student loans. But they don't like the Democrats' plan to close the corporate tax loophole to pay for the extension. (And, yes, it has to be paid for while Republicans still say that tax cuts for the wealthy don't have to be paid for.) In case you missed it, de facto Republican leader in the House, Paul Ryan, has a simple answer to whether he would consider closing this loophole to help students: "Nope."

- more -

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/05/08/1089743/-Senate-Republicans-filibuster-student-loan-bill-

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=112&session=2&vote=00089

[librechik]

1. damn them to hell. n/t

[Drale]

2. Did anyone expect anything different? /nt

[Liberal Veteran]

3. Really? How unexpectedly uncharacteristic of them.

[Inuca]

4. All partisan vote

with Snowe voting present. Except that, all Ds (yes, even Ben Nelson) were AYE, all Rs NO. The lonely D no is Harry Reid, and it's a procedural no, allowing him, in principle, to bring it again to the floor (don't ask why it has to be that way, makes no sense).

[The Wielding Truth]

5. SUMMARY AS OF:4/25/2012--Introduced

SUMMARY AS OF:
4/25/2012--Introduced.

Interest Rate Reduction Act - Amends title IV (Student Assistance) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 to make the 3.4% interest rate on Direct Stafford loans first disbursed to undergraduate students between July 1, 2011, and July 1, 2012, applicable to Direct Stafford loans first disbursed to undergraduate students between July 1, 2011, and July 1, 2013.

Amends the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act to repeal provisions establishing and appropriating funds to the Prevention and Public Health Fund (a Fund to provide for expanded and sustained national investment in prevention and public health programs to improve health and help restrain the rate of growth in private and public sector health care costs). Rescinds any unobligated balanced appropriated to such Fund.

[gratuitous]

6. Taking hostages has worked so well the last couple of years

Why would the Republicans abandon this incredibly useful tool now? Every time they hold something up, they get something they want. They never have to pay a price, nobody ever holds them to account for their obstructionist ways. At the most, someone might say, schoolmarmishly, "Play nice, now!" And the sniggering bullies just laugh and wait to see what their reward will be this time. More money for defense contractors? Further cuts to programs that help citizens who might vote Democratic? What policies, priorities or personnel will Democrats sell down the river this time to appease the Republicans? And why in the world would the Republicans stop using such a winning tactic? It always benefits them and never costs them.

[ProSense]

7. Here's what

Why would the Republicans abandon this incredibly useful tool now? Every time they hold something up, they get something they want. They never have to pay a price, nobody ever holds them to account for their obstructionist ways. At the most, someone might say, schoolmarmishly, "Play nice, now!" And the sniggering bullies just laugh and wait to see what their reward will be this time. More money for defense contractors? Further cuts to programs that help citizens who might vote Democratic? What policies, priorities or personnel will Democrats sell down the river this time to appease the Republicans? And why in the world would the Republicans stop using such a winning tactic? It always benefits them and never costs them.

...I see: 52-45. That means every Democrat voted for it. It's pathetic. Good news for you: Democrats can stand their ground. It's an election year, and the issue isn't life or death and no one will starve or lose their home until the election. The students will get screwed with higher interest rates for awhile, but at least they can pin it on Republicans. Now, if only that would translate into Republicans losing their seats.

[gratuitous]

8. But WILL they pin this on the Republicans?

That's the question, as always. When student loan rates double, will the Democrats be able to explain in clear, simple, no-nonsense terms that it was Republican obstructionism that's costing people money? Magic 8 Ball says "Signs Point to No". Or, will the Democrats, in a tizzy over the prospect of having this bad policy hung around their necks, sell out another constituency so as to "pay for" a continuation of the current rates? The record from the last few years doesn't exactly inspire me with hope.

I think that Democrats should be out front, hollering incessantly about the Republicans, pointing out that Republicans don't require that billions in tax cuts for their fatcat bankrollers don't have to be paid for, but insist that lower loan rates must be paid for. Point out that they're in favor of continuing lower student loan rates, and Republicans want those rates to rise. Say it today, say it tomorrow, say it next week, and the week after that. Show leadership and message discipline, such that even one or two of the talking chuckleheads feels obliged to ask the endless parade of Republican guests about their party's stingy ways.

It can be done, but Democrats for whatever reason are reluctant to play partisan politics against Republican partisanship. And as long as they don't do that, the Republicans get something they want and don't pay a political price.

[ProSense]

11. I'm sure

But WILL they pin this on the Republicans?

That's the question, as always. When student loan rates double, will the Democrats be able to explain in clear, simple, no-nonsense terms that it was Republican obstructionism that's costing people money? Magic 8 Ball says "Signs Point to No". Or, will the Democrats, in a tizzy over the prospect of having this bad policy hung around their necks, sell out another constituency so as to "pay for" a continuation of the current rates? The record from the last few years doesn't exactly inspire me with hope.

...they'll try, and the chorus blaming the Democrats will grow louder. In fact, it's likely to start with this vote. That's how it is.

[spanone]

9. filibuster is all they have to offer, otherwise they'd have to think and they are incapable of that.

[goclark]

10. This is pure evil!

[Scurrilous]

12. @#$% the Senate Republicans.

[Left Coast2020]

13. Didn't the party's darling rMoney support this?

I think he did!!!