2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumHRC's college education plan much more comprehensive
It doesn't just cater to middle class white kids, IMO. It's a riff off of Obama's with some extra tweaks added, and things Warren has supported and suggested as well.
"Clinton's plan would provide tuition-free community college, which Clinton's campaign says would save Massachusetts students around $10,700 over two years.
Clinton's plan would cut the interest rate on student loans so that government does not profit from student loans - an idea Warren previously proposed. It would allow people with existing student loans to refinance them at lower interest rates. A Massachusetts borrower who is paying 6.8 percent interest on $30,000 in loans would see his monthly payments fall by up to $33, according to the Clinton campaign. This would apply to borrowers who attend private and public universities.
The plan would expand an existing program for income-based loan repayment. It would expand education benefits for veterans and AmeriCorps volunteers. It would crack down on deceptive marketing by for-profit schools, allow the use of financial aid for adult learning and online courses, and require colleges and universities to bear some risk when graduates default on loans.
Clinton's plan would be paid for by limiting the tax deductions and credits available to high-income taxpayers."
http://www.masslive.com/politics/index.ssf/2015/08/us_rep_katherine_clark_praises.html
short circuit
(145 posts)It's just fluff and no actual policies - what about old student loans? Are they going to be ever retired?
Come on, it's not enough.
ETA:http://feelthebern.org/bernie-sanders-on-education/#college-tuition
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)"Clinton's plan would be paid for by limiting the tax deductions and credits available to high-income taxpayers."
short circuit
(145 posts)She's not thinking it through.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)You know what DOESNT help the poor? Bernie's proposal for free college for "qualified" young kids. You know why? Because it's not accompanied by a plan to help poor kids get "qualified" in the first place. IMO, it's a naked pander to middle class white kids and their parents who enjoy the privilege of going to decent k-12 schools.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)It has been that way since time immemorial and will continue until college ceases to exist
Your problem isn't with Bernie, it's with reality.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)... Is one of the keys to addressing poverty. Without that his proposals on college do nothing for minorities stuck in failing, underfunded schools. His focus is the middle class white voter. At least that's the appearance to me.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)I barely made it past the 7th grade. I eventually got a GED. With the GED I was qualified to get into Jr College. When I transferred from Community College to the University, I had to be qualified (High enough GPA) to get in. That is how it works.
If I can get in anyone can get in. Paying for it is the big problem.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts).... Just go straight to college AND be able to make it through college?
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)But getting in isn't the problem. It's paying for it that's the problem.
33$ are you kidding me? My monthly loan payment is over $500. 33 dollars barely puts a dent in it.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)As to your personal loan repayment, that is about double the average, and about three times the mean monthly student loan payment. Since the proposed plan is based on lowering interest rates (to essentially non-profit status), YOUR savings would be 3x the amount cited in the article.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)I have a $30k loan just like in the article.
My payments were about $217 until 5 months ago when they decided I wasn't paying it back fast enough so they essentially doubled it.
$33 is nothing. And if it were tripled it would still barely make a dent in what I pay now.
SonderWoman
(1,169 posts)Unlike the "big, bold, and....unrealistic" proposals from some others. I think she'll choose Warren as her VP.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)On both counts.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)THAT would be exciting. and the dynamic warren. the mouthy warren. lol
oh, two very strong and vocal women
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)nt
JackInGreen
(2,975 posts)MaggieD
(7,393 posts)These are not new positions for her either.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)CURSE YOU ALBINO BABIES!!!
JackInGreen
(2,975 posts)Screams "privilage" doncha'know.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Evil albinos, they're everywhere...
ljm2002
(10,751 posts)...about the race baiting.
Garrett78
(10,721 posts)"A Massachusetts borrower who is paying 6.8 percent interest on $30,000 in loans would see his monthly payments fall by up to $33, according to the Clinton campaign."
Wow, as much as a whopping 33 bucks? Well, that'll help pay for one small bag of groceries.
I realize that usury isn't going away anytime soon, unfortunately. But c'mon, college could easily be made free just by cutting military spending or by raising taxes on the wealthiest. The US to this day has some 800 military bases around the world--a massive waste of money. "Up to 33 bucks." I'd laugh if it wasn't so pathetic.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)Dors Bernie have some plan just to forgive the debt? I don't think the government has the ability to do that, legally. Do you?
Even the banks had to pay back their loans, right?
MaggieD
(7,393 posts).... If you're interested.
http://www.brookings.edu/research/papers/2014/06/19-typical-student-loan-debt-akers
Roy Ellefson
(279 posts)Only student loan relief plan I support is one that forgives all loans and offers free college tuition going forward. If we can bail out the bankers we can bail out students and for every asshole who whines because they don't get a similar bailout, send them some cash...why not? it would be stimulative and helluvalot cheaper than bailing out wall street.
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)Allow refinancing of student debt at lower rates. And she has long supported repayment as a percentage of earnings when loan repayment comes due.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)The government made money off of that. That's why we couldn't take that money and use it to pay off people's mortgages or student loans.
postatomic
(1,771 posts)And it isn't being funded by the 'pot of gold at the end of the rainbow'.
This is really needed and one more (of many) reason to support Hillary.
ljm2002
(10,751 posts)...depend on changes to the tax code: Bernie would put a small transaction tax on Wall Street's high speed trades and Hillary would limit tax deductions for affluent taxpayers. IOW, each candidate has stated an explicit mechanism to fund their proposal.
So how is one pie-in-the-sky while the other one is realistic? Obviously both depend on getting the desired tax changes through Congress which will be an uphill battle for either candidate should they become President.
postatomic
(1,771 posts)Neither plan will see the light day. I'm looking at what I consider to be more viable than the other.
That doesn't mean that it will make it through Congress. Who knows what evil the new President will have to deal with.
ljm2002
(10,751 posts)"And it isn't being funded by the 'pot of gold at the end of the rainbow'."?
MoveIt
(399 posts)just guessing
Vattel
(9,289 posts)Colleges and universities are already strapped for money. Will the colleges and universities have to make tuition higher to pay for their share of the loans that are defaulted on? Tuition has gone up largely because state support for colleges and universities has gone down. O'Malley did a good job in Maryland bucking that trend, but nationwide the trend continues.
Why should one student get free tuition for two years of community college when another student who is good enough to get accepted at a four year college right out of high school pays in full for her first two years of college?
We need to provide equal opportunity and reward merit. There needs to be a plan to ensure that minority groups such as AAs, Latinos and Native Americans have the same educational opportunities as Anglos. That would require, among other things, heavy investments in poor urban neighborhoods. The child who unfairly gets a bad early education is unfairly disadvantaged for life. Until we start fighting institutional racism by working towards true equality in early educational opportunity, success in higher education will be a privilege unjustly denied to countless members of minority groups.
Romulox
(25,960 posts)MaggieD
(7,393 posts)Much of it has been her position for nearly a decade. Are you pissed that she listened to Warren and added her ideas to the plan? Because I think Warren was the sole member of the "focus group" you are imagining.
Now, what about Bernie's completely non-viable plan? What say you about that? Is it better to have a plan that has zero chance of passing? IOW, are the warm fuzzies better than actually helping people? I say no.
Gothmog
(145,554 posts)SouthernProgressive
(1,810 posts)ismnotwasm
(42,008 posts)FSogol
(45,526 posts)It gives immediate relief to borrowers, rein in tuition costs, increases Pell grants, even allows for childcare for returning students, and much, much more.
Read the entire plan here:
https://14d2r744okfe40r1ug1oqm6y-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/OMalley-Debt-Free-College-Goal.pdf
Vattel
(9,289 posts)I like some of O'Malley's ideas, but O'Malley's plan presupposes that government needs to step in and help to run universities. Not a good idea. For example, freezing tuition rates immediately is bad idea that would throw a huge wrench into many universities' financial planning. Also, the idea that you can magically increase graduation rates, or timely graduation rates, by simply rewarding such increases or punishing failures to achieve such increases is really naïve. It reminds me of the silly no child left behind approach to education. Just demand success and you magically achieve it.
edited to add: I don't like Clinton's plan either. And I do think that O'Malley did a good job in Maryland keeping tuition from going up there without undermining Maryland's universities. So I think he generally knows what he is doing and maybe his "plan" is a bit over-simplified.
FSogol
(45,526 posts)graduating students. I don't think it pre-supposes a Federal takeover, it is more intended for the States to rein in their public universities like Maryland successfully did. Private schools won't change as much.
Vattel
(9,289 posts)That made the freeze on tuition doable. That was well-executed and kudos to O'Malley for that. But as President there is much less he could do. He could reward states with public funds if certain goals are achieved, but I get very nervous when that sort of approach is used to "reform" higher education.
FSogol
(45,526 posts)I encourage everyone to read his plan.
https://14d2r744okfe40r1ug1oqm6y-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/OMalley-Debt-Free-College-Goal.pdf
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)But I will be honest, I have not spent much time paying attention to him. He's barely measuring in the polls, and I am not thrilled with what he did to policing as mayor of Baltimore or Gov of MD. Given my disinclination toward him he'd have to get more traction before I would spend time paying a lot of attention to his proposals.
Vattel
(9,289 posts)MaggieD
(7,393 posts)Like I said, I haven't paid too much attention to him for reasons I have previously stated. But please do let me know which of the things listed in the poster touting his plan's post that Hillary doesn't support. I am open to listening.
Vattel
(9,289 posts)"Governor OMalley is calling on states to immediately freeze tuition rates. . . . He is also calling on states to restore investments in higher education. As president, he would partner with states, leveraging federal dollars through matching grants to encourage states to increase funding for public colleges and universities."
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)So how can you claim it's a policy proposal? I thought you said his plan contained policy proposals that she does not support? I think what you mean is he is jawboning the states about things she isn't. Would that be more accurate?
Vattel
(9,289 posts)"As president, he would partner with states, leveraging federal dollars through matching grants to encourage states to increase funding for public colleges and universities."
MaggieD
(7,393 posts)"Attending an In-state College Would Be Cheaper
The core of Clintons plan would allow students to earn a four-year degree from state colleges and universities without taking out loans to pay for tuition. Shed do that by providing federal grants to states, as long as the states up their investment in higher education. As tuition at public colleges has climbed rapidly in the past several years, state spending per student has fallen by almost a quarter, according the the State Higher Education Executive Officers Association. Families are now responsible for roughly half the cost of college. This federal-state partnership would account for more than half the cost of Clintons plan, about $175 billion."
Vattel
(9,289 posts)Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)their community and are easy to schedule classes around a person who works. We have to work for our future and getting an education in order to obtain better jobs and of course higher wages.