Author Archive: kandriulli

A good summary of yesterday’s hearings on climate legislation

Thursday, April 23rd, 2009

This blog post from Grist gives a good overview of how hearings went yesterday in the House Energy and Commerce Committee, and mentions specifically moves on the part of conservatives in an attempt to counteract progressive voices:

“There were four separate panels on the climate bill on Wednesday, involving 21 witnesses. The fourth was added at the last minute to accommodate witnesses whom the minority members of the panel had requested, including representatives from conservative outposts like the Heritage Foundation, the Competitive Enterprise Institute, and the American Enterprise Institute. The hearings stretched on for more than 10 hours, and by the end, as few as four members of the committee were actually present to hear testimony.”

We need to keep applying pressure to our representatives to make clear to them why we need a clean energy economy now. Take action and make your voice heard!

USA Today: Tuition at public universities continues to rise

Wednesday, April 22nd, 2009

A story today in USA Today talks about what many college students and their parents already know: tuition is creeping higher and higher:

“Though 2009-2010 tuition rates have not been set for most public universities, increases of at least 5% to 6% — and in many cases higher — are expected as university administrators struggle to maintain quality education amid state budget cuts.”

And, the money quote:

“U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan stresses the importance of affordability amid the budget and fundraising crises. ‘Colleges that go the wrong way on this — I think they’re going to see students walk away.’ “

You can read the full story here.

Now, more than ever, we need to make sure that we are giving money to students, not banks, and that the grants students are receiving are as generous as possible. Obama’s budget plan would do that. Take action today and tell your elected officials why we need to back Obama’s budget proposals for higher education!

EPA says climate change bill would cost less than originally anticipated

Wednesday, April 22nd, 2009

The Wall Street Journal has a piece today about the first round of arguments in the climate change debate taking place in Congress. Most notably, the EPA presented new analysis of the bill put forward by Reps. Waxman and Markey on the House Energy Committee, stating that the plan would cost consumers far less than the nearly $3,000 a year per household that many opponents have referenced.

Check out the pdf of the EPA’s analysis here.

Which comes first? Health care or climate change?

Tuesday, April 21st, 2009

With so much at stake in the coming weeks, there has been much speculation about which problems will be tackled first (if at all) during this Congressional session. While Obama has laid out clear goals of fixing health care, tackling climate change, and improving higher education, it remains to be seen which issue Congress will make a priority.

Despite Rep. Henry Waxman’s promise to move a climate bill through the House by Memorial Day,  The Wall Street Journal speculates that health care will be addressed before climate change issues, which are more controversial:

“A growing number of Democratic lawmakers prefer health care, saying that has a far greater chance of producing consensus than climate change, inside the party and across party lines. And they argue that it would be a more tangible accomplishment to present to financially stressed voters heading into the 2010 midterm elections.”

Read the full article here, and keep checking back here to see how things unfold. In the meantime, call your Senator today and tell him/her which issues YOU think should be a priority.

Campus Progress and US Students Association Speak Out in Support of Direct Lending

Tuesday, April 21st, 2009

In an op-ed published in today’s Inside Higher Ed, CP’s Pedro de la Torre and USSA’s President Carmen Berkley advocate on behalf of students over banks, arguing that “Our country faces too many challenges for us to be providing pointless corporate welfare to loan companies.”

Here is an excerpt:

“The president’s plan will save taxpayers $94 billion over 10 years by ending pointless subsidies to loan companies and using government funds to lend directly to students. Because loan repayment is guaranteed by the federal government, private lenders assume very little risk under the FFELP and yet are rewarded handsomely — a subsidy that makes little economic sense. Much of the savings from the move to direct lending would be used to increase the maximum Pell grant award to $5,550 for the 2010-11 school year, and make the Pell grant a mandatory government program guaranteed an increase — inflation plus 1 percent — every year.

There are other important reasons to make the change. For one, the FFELP program is prone to corruption. A 2006 audit of the student lender Nelnet by the U.S. Department of Education’s inspector general revealed that the company had received more than $1 billion in taxpayer subsidies by gaming the system. Another investigation in 2007 led by New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo found that lenders were lavishing gifts, payments, and other inducements on college financial aid officers in order to encourage them to recommend their loans to unwitting students.”

Check out the full op-ed here!

Rahm Emanuel: “Obama will get an energy bill” this year

Monday, April 20th, 2009

Check out this new story from CQ Politics about where the administration stands on passing energy legislation this year, and then click here to find out how you can take action to support this legislation in the budget!

Here’s an excerpt:

When asked about resistance to the cap-and-trade proposal — those opposed have argued it will lead to a tax increase — Emanuel said, “When you have something of this magnitude, there’s going to be people that raise objections, because it’s a big change. Our goal is to get that done. We will see.

“You’re asking me right before the legislative process starts to make that prediction. I do think this, that even those who object to particulars know that we have to deal with this part of our energy policy and that the challenge now is, rather than to criticize and rather than say no, rather than to say never, is to provide ideas. And that has yet to happen from the other side.”

Three more papers come out in support of switch to direct lending

Friday, April 17th, 2009

Today, three more papers followed the New York Times, coming out in support of the President’s plan to end the FFELP program for student lending and save taxpayers $94 billion:

Las Vegas Sun:

“The purpose of student loans is to ensure that academically qualified students have access to higher education, not to subsidize private lenders with taxpayer money. Congress should jump at this chance to use billions of dollars in savings to increase federal educational grants.”

Sacramento Bee:

“Just who is supposed to be the beneficiary of federal financial aid for college, anyway? By ending unnecessary subsidies to private lenders, Americans get reduced costs and students get more direct aid – a win-win solution.”

San Antonio Express News:

“The move to restructure the student loan business is not just about banks and jobs. It’s about education and students who generally don’t have high-priced lobbyists looking out for their interests in Washington.”

New York Times backs ending FFELP program for student loans

Thursday, April 16th, 2009

In an editorial published today, the New York Times came out against the FFELP program, stating that the “direct-lending proposal is clearly in the country’s best interest.” Check out the excerpt below:

The direct-loan program suffered no such disruption. In addition to being more reliable, direct lending is also less expensive. Equally important, according to the Congressional Budget Office, the country would save $94 billion over the next decade by switching completely to direct lending.

This would not in fact “grow government,” as conservatives in Congress have already begun to charge. The loans would be handled through colleges, just the way Pell Grants are now. The loans would then be serviced and collected by private companies that are already competing for this lucrative business.

More op-eds attacking cap and trade

Monday, April 13th, 2009

From a number of papers across the country…take action today and write a letter to the editor!

Fort Worth Star Telegram: “Study the (scary) figures on cap and trade”

Wichita Eagle: “Cap-and-Trade Tax Would Be Costly for Kansas”

Las Vegas Review Journal: Obama’s cap-and-trade plan a wolf in sheep’s clothing

The Newark Advocate: New proposal could cost Ohioans in higher energy prices”

Pittsburgh Tribune-Review: “Obama’s clobber & trade”

New York Times breaks down the student loan fight

Monday, April 13th, 2009

This new article in the New York Times delves into both sides of the fight over President Obama’s student loan budget plan. Unsurprisingly, student loan companies are up in arms about the plan, which would end the Federal Family Education Loan Program (FFELP) and make spending on Pell grants mandatory (read more about the budget plan here.)

Rep. Allen Boyd (D-FL), mentioned in the article, is a vocal opponent of the higher education plan laid out in the President’s budget. If you are a student in Florida, speak up and make your voice heard! Write a letter to the editor or op-ed today explaining why you support a progressive budget plan for higher education.

Also, check out Campus Progress’ toolkit for tips and ideas about how you can get involved and lobby your representatives during the Congressional recess.