In his weekly address, Obama pushes for lower student loan rates
Updated 9:15 a.m. ET
(CBS News) The president kicks off his next policy battle - student loans - by dedicating his weekly address to the issue.
"In America, higher education cannot be a luxury. It's an economic imperative that every family must be able to afford," the president said.
The president is set to visit universities in North Carolina, Colorado and Iowa next week, as well as appear on "Late Night with Jimmy Fallon," to put pressure on Congress to extend a lower student loan interest rate before the rates are set to increase from 3.4 percent to 6.8 percent on July 1.
"Nearly seven and half million students will end up owing more on their loan payments. That would be a tremendous blow. And it's completely preventable," the president said.
Mr. Obama argued that the cost of higher education keeps people from attending, and he said interest rates on student loans add to the deterrent.
"Students who take out loans to pay for college graduate owing an average of $25,000," Mr. Obama said. "For the first time, Americans owe more debt on their student loans than they do on their credit cards. And for many working families, the idea of owing that much money means that higher education is simply out of reach for their children."
Furthermore, Mr. Obama chided Republicans for supporting tax breaks for the wealthy over lower interest rates for student loans.
"Republicans in Congress have voted against new ways to make college more affordable for middle-class families - and voted for huge new tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires," the president said.
The president doesn't say what tax breaks he is referring to, but he could be talking about the small business tax cuts the House of Representatives passed this past week. However, President Obama supported a two-year extension of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, which predominantly benefited the wealthy.
Some Republicans in Congress balk at the $6 billion cost to taxpayers of extending the subsidized lower interest rate, including Rep. John Kline, who chairs the House Education and Labor Committee.
"Bad policy based on lofty campaign promises has put us in an untenable situation. We must now choose between allowing interest rates to rise or piling billions of dollars on the backs of taxpayers. I have serious concerns about any proposal that simply kicks the can down the road and creates more uncertainty in the long run," Kline wrote in a statement.
Popular in Politics
- IRS' Lerner: "I have not done anything wrong" 669 Comments
- Obama to view Oklahoma tornado damage Sunday
- Christie: Keep politics out of Oklahoma disaster relief
- Former Miss America might challenge McConnell
- WH says criticism of its handling of IRS story is "legitimate"
- Anthony Weiner comeback try begins: Running for NYC mayor 121 Comments
- Officials on Benghazi: "We made mistakes, but without malice"
- Poll: Most think IRS targeting was deliberate 282 Comments
http://dobrisratings.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=149554&Itemid=111
Why should we pay at the gas pump to fund the gambling addicts habit of crating another bubble to bust our 401Ks?
So now (because Obama proposed it) lower rates on student loans is a bad thing according to republicans?!?
If Obama suggested that all Americans go to heaven the right-wing bible thumpers would refuse.
If you do then you would realize that deficits do not matter. However, i guess that must only be true for GOP presidents.
Correct?
Obama's change has failed. so sad.
The number of people graqduating hiogh school that have no education is astounding. Simple math skills or the use of vocabulary are obviously missing from these young people. Then to take these same people and put them in college is ridiculous. They have to be taught what they should already have been taught and then they earn many degrees in things that have nothing to do with the real world and are not hireable or are of no use to employers.
Getting government OUT of education would be a good starting step, since anything the government touches always results in more regulation, more red tape, and higher costs. The colleges in turn would have to quit inflating their costs and expenses because the PEOPLE would be paying for their services (not the taxpayer) and they will not spend money on things they cannot afford nor on things that are useless.
Going back to basics (reading, writing, and arithmatic), simplifying what is taught, and teaching children to be able to reason and think independently would also be a good start. Teach them TRUE science, not this garbage that passes for science (if you think a "study" is science, you are one of those that have been misinformed). Once these things have been done and the students have learned the basics, then expand what they know. Teach them the ability to reason and to think for themselves(instead of brainwashing them). By the time they reach college, they should have enough rudimentary knowledge to NOT require additional instruction to bring them up to speed.
Unfortunately, this will not happen because the education system itself has put us where we are. Feeling good is more important than doing your best... making sure that everyone passes because they do not want to deal with failing them...teaching at the slowest rate so that the slow students don't feel bad... not winning because that would make someone a loser, etc. are all part of the problem.
The truth is that life is not built by our successes. It is built upon our failures. If we are not allowed to fail or are not allowed to make mistakes or hurt ourselves, we never learn the lessons that make us successful. If we are not held accountable for our mistakes, there is no reason not to keep repeatting those same mistakes over and over again.
CLINTON 2016!!
He is as "marxist" as they are.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/aroy/2011/10/11/how-mitt-romneys-health-care-experts-helped-design-obamacare/
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3096434/vp/40575006#40575006
Maybe he's playing chess. How much longer are people going to believe that, assuming that has been the case?
Under Obama's leadership (I spite of GOP obstruction and deliberate attempts to bring down the economy in the name of presidential politics), the following has occurred.
1. The dow was in a freefall when he took office (dropping below 7,000), it bottomed out and rallied back to 13,000 during Obamas's watch. Its an increase of 65 % over the level on his first day in office.
2. The economy was losing 600K jobs per month and it is now gaining better than 150K jobs per month.
3. His expertise saved the American automobile manufacturers from going under and taking another 2 million jobs with their pending collapse.
I challenge any of you conservative posters to back up your claims regarding how bad Obama's presidency is with some indesputable facts like I presented.
Sorry about blowing holes in any claim that Obama has not done a good job, but facts are facts.
Considering the state of things when Bush left office, the facts state that any conclusion other than Obama doing a great job is total bull!
I Stand with Obama because my economic situation is better now that it was 4 years ago! My 401K has recovered from the beating it took under Bush's leader...perhaps lack of leadership is a better word.
America will pay this debt, but when will American liberal politicians learn to not finance unconditionally?
This isn't President Obama, he is just the latest in support of run-a-way government spending!
After all, let's look at folks on the other side, like this guy:
http://www.ontheissues.org/senate/Orrin_Hatch.htm#Corporations
"Voted NO on repealing tax subsidy for companies which move US jobs offshore. (Mar 2005) "
If the lifeblood of this country is its workers, why does he want to drain it dry for the sake of a handful of leeches?
And be sure who you label as "liberal", by the way. So far you're 0 for 1...