White House Threatens To Veto GOP Student Loan Plan

The White House is threatening to veto a plan put forth by House Republicans to reduce student loan interest rates by pulling money from the Prevention and Public Health Fund, a funding stream set aside by the Affordable Care Act to support preventative health initiatives across the country.

"Unfortunately, rather than finding common ground on a way to pay for this critical policy, H.R. 4628 includes an attempt to repeal the Prevention and Public Health Fund, created to help prevent disease, detect it early, and manage conditions before they become severe," the White House said in a statement on Friday.

"Women, in particular, will benefit from this Prevention Fund, which would provide for hundreds of thousands of screenings for breast and cervical cancer. This is a politically-motivated proposal and not the serious response that the problem facing America’s college students deserves. If the President is presented with H.R. 4628, his senior advisors would recommend that he veto the bill."

While Republicans and Democrats agree that it is crucial to prevent student loan interest rates from doubling to 6.8 percent, as they are set to do on July 1, the two parties have proposed very different ways of paying for that loss of revenue, estimated at $6 billion.

Democrats would close a tax loophole they have dubbed the "Gingrich/Edwards Loophole," which allows millionaires to avoid paying Medicare taxes. Republicans want to eliminate the preventative health fund, which House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) called a "slush fund" on Wednesday.

In response to the White House's veto threat on Friday, a spokesman for Boehner accused President Barack Obama of using the student loan issue for political gain.

“The president is so desperate to fake a fight that he’s willing to veto a bill to help students over a slush fund that he advocated cutting in his own budget," said Brendan Buck. "It’s a simple as this: Republicans are acting to help college students and the president is now getting in the way."

Also on HuffPost:

Comments

[ginpowell]

12:42 PM on 05/01/2012

god forbid we should help educate anyone!!

[Meldy1]

04:30 AM on 05/01/2012

@Jim Dicken,can you honestly prove in court your allegations about our First Lady being disbarred?Let's go to court and settle it there.....another hating Mr.Dicken,maybe you have problems serious hating problems.You have to prove in court your allegations....Oirly Taitz has to pay thousands of dollars about her fabrication...I think Mr.Dicken dreamed one night,he was disbarred from commenting in here...

[Big Horn Man]

12:02 AM on 04/30/2012

Speaking of health prevention initiatives, most cervical cancer is caused by HPV. Okay, the HPV virus is transmitted thru sexual contact. I got an idea. Keep your zipper up. Just stay virgin till marriage. Oh, wait. Look at the example of Tim Tebow. He is still a virgin. He's clean and patient for the right woman. If we follow his example, then we don't have to pay a lot of money for these health prevention initiatives. All the money intended for these initiatives would go to the student loans. Problem is solved!

[gr8bsn]

08:08 AM on 05/01/2012

But but but.... we wanna do what feels good at all costs!!!!!

[jeffdaschel]

02:38 AM on 05/04/2012

You can say what you hear on Fox news or hear from your church all you want, most women using birth control use it for hormonal reasons that have little or nothing to do with sex. Regardless of your sense of morality, don't you believe that telling women to be like Tim Tebow to keep from getting cervical cancer is a little short-sighted? I'm sure you don't, but open your mind. You might find being thoughtful and kind was a satisfying way to live your life.

[hungryblackcat]

11:44 PM on 04/29/2012

Projection "In response to the White House's veto threat on Friday, a spokesman for Boehner accused President Barack Obama of using the student loan issue for political gain."

[cybersense]

01:38 PM on 04/29/2012

A little history is needed by reading comments. First, the subsidized Stafford loans for students who qualify for them used to be made thru Banks, and there was another option that was called FDEL (which is no longer available) was also thru Private banks. The Gov would subsidize those rates, and would cover any loss if it wasn't paid back. Now, if a student needs a subsidized Stafford loan, it is now available directly to the Gov. Taking out the middle man, and taking away other services that racked up higher rates via the bank is gone. The direct loan method from the Gov for loans as actually saved Gov. and the ppl borrowing that money quite a bit of money. About 10 million on one program itself to the Gov over the next several years. Before this was done, in 2007, there was a rate reduction for the Stafford loans that were subsidized (there are Stafford loans that are not subsidized, and now only pay 6.8 percent and it used to be higher). Back then, it was fight as well with the GOP in Congress. It also meant Banks that were giving them got less in rates as well, but now that the Banks are out of the picture, it really means that the current rates are already have been paid for, no real budget movement, and b/c of getting rid of other Bank loans and methods, Gov is still saving money. This thing with Boehner saying he needs to take money from the ACA slush fund is a ploy. It's not needed. No money "wasted" really. With this knowledge, perhaps ppl can understand more what craziness it really is to expect that the Gov has to find money for it. It has already, and then some.

[itsPaulLive]

11:14 AM on 04/29/2012

Mr President and you're lovely White house peoples . START TO at least LOOK LIKE ure helping, I mean its kinda pathetic how bad you're "attempts" are . Thank you #illBeInDebtForever

[cybersense]

01:40 PM on 04/29/2012

You must be new to politics?

[SangZe]

11:12 AM on 04/29/2012

A threat is one thing, a promise is another. In the end, Obama will cave. He always does. That's why the dims are losing their voice.

[l78lancer]

03:30 AM on 04/29/2012

Obama has been saying all along that he wants to close tax loopholes. This is a prime opportunity. He and the dems have caved too frequently in the past on his key programs or issues. It should get fixed in the senate bill. But if it comes to him without it being paid by closing it and he doesn't veto it, he may be setting himself up for difficulty in the fall.

[cybersense]

01:41 PM on 04/29/2012

The current rates on these loans have been paid for already. I posted a comment abt that above.

[Zeroes]

02:27 AM on 04/29/2012

The Left has dreamed up another crisis.

[Zeroes]

02:23 AM on 04/29/2012

Okay, since we are going communist, let's start by making a four year education free at an accredited university.

[cybersense]

01:45 PM on 04/29/2012

It is not "communism" to be able to acquire a loan directly from the Gov. at a lower rate. These are only for subs. stafford loans for those who qualify. Those who do not have a cap on unsubsidized rates that are currently capped at 6.8 percent. 

In 2010, Gov got rid of loans of this nature that gave subs. to private banks to give these loans out. They also got rid of another program that wasn't working well, and costing both gov and ppl money in the end, and just simplified it. This is saving the Gov. abt 10 billion dollars over the next several years. 

I am not sure you know what "communism" is, but no where in America is there such a thing, and we are no where near it either.

[YourMindsEye]

12:42 AM on 04/29/2012

Obama will not veto this bill. A recent poll said that young voters that flocked to Obama in 2008 are not as strong a voting block for Obama this time around.

[SangZe]

11:13 AM on 04/29/2012

If he caves, he will lose what's left of the women's vote.

[demotom]

06:39 PM on 04/28/2012

President Obama should veto the republican bill that takes it out on the backs of women and the poor. Let the republicans pass another bill that pays for the continuation of lower interest rates on student loans by cutting out a few high dollar military play toys that we don't need or increasing the taxes on the rich by closing some meaningful loop holes that are big enough to drive a Mac truck through.

[foresure]

10:25 PM on 04/28/2012

demotom

Your statement is sharp and clear. Faved.

[ray3038]

08:45 AM on 04/29/2012

Better yet, veto the bill and then take it out of the congressional budget for all of their little perks and cut their salary by 50%. They aren't doing anything to run this country to warrant full pay.

[foresure]

02:11 PM on 04/29/2012

ray3038

Part I

The starting point could be travel.

What besides sampling the local cuisine and other attractions, what is the good of a half a dozen Congressmen, their staffs, translators, a doctor, military attache, and securuity staying for three or four days in a Five Star Hotel on a fact finding mission?

Almost every newspaper in the world is on-line, every poliltical group is on-line, every political leader in the world has plenty of electronic communication.

Every country in the world (with a couple of exceptions) has an American Ambassador, a CIA chief, a military attache, and various other operatives.

Why couldn't these people fly to Washington once a year, and brief those interested?

As everyone knows, all you have to do is put in the name of a country into Google, and you will find out more about any country than you ever thought possible.

You can find the price of a visit to the doctor in the Czech Republic. (Under US$1.00)

Even North Korea has a tourism site.

[foresure]

02:14 PM on 04/29/2012

ray:

Part III

That's better than our other combat zone. In Kabul the rate is around $500.00 a night in the Serena Hotel there. That would come to $10,000 a night for 20 people, for four nights + dining and local travel. That comes to almost exactly the income for a year for an American family. That of course is without per diem, and travel expenses.

Aside from taking in a "bacha bazi" show, what can these politicians learn about Afghan that they can't learn via secured communication and Google?

Of course they would not want to miss the "bacha bazi", for two reasons, It is apparently unique to Afghanistan, and most importantly we finance many of the people who run the shows.

Be sure to Google "bacha bazi".

Open source request, seriously, not rhetorical question:

What can be learned from these "fact finind missions" that can't be learned through secure electronic communication, and the internet.

[justbeingme201]

01:21 PM on 04/28/2012

Vote out the Republicans, ASAP.

[Chris Yoder]

05:13 PM on 04/28/2012

They are just giving Obama a taste of his own medicine. You don't like it though do you.

[Randolph Greer]

10:24 PM on 04/28/2012

No, they are just being what they are. Despicable human beings.

[tonycgi]

11:01 AM on 04/28/2012

And the political football keeps going, the White House is concerned about the youth vote, the Repubs are trying to give thenm a break, but to pay for it. But the problem always comes down to how to pay for and where to get the money.

[whitcombc]

10:44 AM on 04/28/2012

Things like this mess are just what the GOP needs to undercut Obama. The Dems are so bad at telling the facts before the GOP floods the airways with the lies that a VETO of this could be devastating for Obama. He needs to get out there NOW and flood the press with more than "I'm going to veto this because the GOP messed it up." He is going to have to be clear, simple and mad. When he is given a gift like Romney's "Borrow from your parents" line, it should be the clearest, easiest laugh line. "Governor Romney thinks poor people, unemployed people with kids have bags of cash lying around to "lend" to their kids! He must be joking! The hashtag for this ought to be #HUH?" But the Veto, by itself is too easy to get flipped - "Obama SAYS he wants to help College Kids but he goes and vetos the bill that would have helped them! His cronies, the special interests on Wall St want that loan interest and Obama has complied." Watch out - this Veto better be clear to people with an IQ of 85!

[Randolph Greer]

10:39 PM on 04/28/2012

I understand your comment but in this case it will not hurt Obama because the Republicans decided to take it out of something far more important to people than student loan interest rates. Preventive health care for women which make up more than half those taking out student loans would be the victim. This veto would not only not hurt Obama, it would help him because it would adversely affect more people and reinforce and illustrate the Republican "War on Women." This one is a two-fer for the President and the Democrats.