Sanders vs. Clinton: Who Has the Best Plan for America's College Students?

[jkbRN]

Last edited Tue Sep 29, 2015, 06:50 PM - Edit history (1)

The differences between the college financing plans offered by Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton are important - both for their impact on the middle class, and for what they tell us about the candidates and their governing philosophies.

Elementary and high school education is correctly seen as the bridge to a better future for young people. It is offered to all, at no cost, because we understand that society does better when the individuals within it do better.

The Sanders plan provides tuition-free public higher education to every qualified student. The Clinton plan does not.

The Sanders plan treats higher education the same way we have treated other forms of education in the past: Every young person who studies hard and succeeds in school should be able to get the education they need. By contrast, the Clinton plan charges tuition to middle-class students, using an as-yet unspecified formula based on a family's income.

The Clinton approach is unnecessarily complicated.

The Clinton plan is unnecessarily complicated and difficult to administer. It leaves a number of key questions open to manipulation by future politicians, such as: What are the thresholds for paying part of the tuition? What's a reasonable percent of family income to pay into the program?
Compare that to the simplicity and safety of a program like Social Security, which is run at very low administrative cost. If you qualify for its benefits, you receive them. We don't "means test" Social Security - and we shouldn't. We shouldn't do it for a public higher education, either.

The Clinton plan holds political risk.

The principles behind the Clinton plan seem closer to some of the Republican candidates' ideas than they do to those of great Democratic presidents like Franklin D. Roosevelt. Chris Christie, for example, wants to cut Social Security benefits for Americans earning over $80,000.

Another conservative group, the Concord Coalition, proposed that Social Security benefits be cut for any family whose annual income exceeds $40,000 per year - and that includes both Social Security benefits and the cash value of their Medicare protection!

That's the problem with ideas like these. Once the door is open, there's always the possibility that politicians will use them to shift costs to the middle class.

The Clinton plan also requires middle-class students to work as well as study, something their wealthier peers won't be required to do.

The Clinton plan also forces students who receive financial aid to work 10 hours a week, in addition to keeping up with their coursework.

College is a time for study and achievement. It can also be competitive. Students who are forced to comply with Clinton's 10-hour-per week work requirement - which is 1/4th of a full-time job - will carry a heavy burden of time and effort. Wealthy students won't share that burden because their parents are paying full tuition.

"I'm not going to give free college to kids who don't work some hours to try to put their own effort into their education," says Hillary Clinton. But nothing is being "given." Students must work hard and achieve academic success in order to be accepted to college. This seems like an oddly judgmental framing, especially if we believe that higher education and hard work are the doors to opportunity and improvement - for each individual student, and for society as a whole.

The Clinton plan doesn't ask enough of the rich. It places a financial burden on the middle class instead.

It's sometimes possible to make a burden on the middle class sound like a progressive idea. Chris Christie ludicrously claimed that "the left are defending the rich," for example, because progressives want to protect and expand Social Security benefits for everyone. (He didn't mention the fact that progressives want "the rich" to pay their fair share in taxes to cover it.)

Hillary Clinton defends her college plan by saying that "I am not going to give free college education to wealthy kids." And yet Social Security, Medicare, public elementary and high schools, the federal highway system, and a host of other programs are also available to all who qualify.

The Clinton plan is not a "no debt" program.

While it has been described as a plan for eliminating student debt, the Clinton plan is highly unlikely to accomplish that goal. Middle-class families are struggling to make ends meet - a situation that already forced many to take on debt. Any plan which adds to their costs by charging for college tuition will inevitably force some cash-strapped families to take on additional debt.

The Sanders plan is a mainstream, practical and smart proposal.

The Sanders plan, by contrast, lies squarely in the line of great initiatives like Social Security. And it's not a new idea. The University of California offered free tuition to all in-state residents until the 1980s. The average tuition fee at a four-year public university in 1965 was only $243. Many of the best colleges, including the City University of New York, charged no tuition at all.

Germany eliminated tuition at public universities last year because they understood that their modest fees - roughly $1,300 per year - discouraged qualified students from going to college. Other countries are doing the same.
In the end, the difference between these two plans isn't just financial. It also reflects different views of ourselves as a nation, and different attitudes toward the middle class and the young.

The Source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rj-eskow/sanders-vs-clinton-who-ha_b_8216290.html

[HerbChestnut]

1. Pretty much sums it up. Thanks for posting!

[msongs]

2. best plan is to de-privatize them and go back to government funded and operated. worked fine for

decades with low interest rates

[elleng]

3. Martin O'Malley, DEBT FREE COLLEGE

One might ask how this nation fell from first in the world to fourteenth in producing college graduates.

We did it one onerous student loan at a time.

In Maryland, we saw these trends and refused to give up. We froze tuition at public four-year institutions, while making investments in universities, community colleges, and financial aid to help make up the difference. We took steps to make sure our high school students were graduating with a degree that’s worth something, and with some college credit or technical training already under their belt.

But like any state, we couldn’t solve the problem on our own. To really make a dent in student debt, the federal government will have to act.

Fortunately, the solutions are simple and straightforward.

First, Congress must allow students to refinance the debt they already have. Because unlike homeowners or businesses, student borrowers can’t refinance their loans.

This is outrageous. If we were able to bail out big banks, we can figure out a way to refinance college loans.

It’s also a big problem. Although Congress lowered student loan interest rates in 2013, they only extended the fix to new borrowers. That leaves millions of existing borrowers piling up debt at interest rates at or above 7 percent. Because Congress set the high rates, Congress has the power to fix them.

Second, we should cap the monthly payments on students’ loans, so that students whose passion is teaching or policing or national service can pursue their dreams without worrying about debt or default.

The good news is that we already have programs in place to do this. Numerous “income-based repayment” programs are available, and the Obama Administration recently expanded students’ access to them.

But enrollment in the programs is low. A better policy would be to make income-based repayment automatic, then let kids opt out if they want to.

In addition, all low- and middle-income students enrolled in the programs should have their minimum monthly loan payments capped at 10 percent of their take-home pay. In many cases, this would save students hundreds of dollars on their payments every month. And all borrowers who take advantage of these programs would eventually have the balance on their loan forgiven.

Alone, these two proposals – letting students refinance their loans, and capping their loan payments – will go a long way toward relieving student debt. They are smart, common sense policies that would make millions of students better off.

To be sure, to end the student debt crisis for good we have to make college affordable for everyone. We can’t afford to make loans easier to pay off, only to have colleges keep raising tuition costs. And we must hold colleges that receive federal aid dollars accountable for directing aid toward the students who need it most — by tying the receipt of aid to schools’ performance on that score, or rewarding schools that excel at making college affordable.

Our ultimate goal must be for every student, most especially low-income and middle-class students, to be able to go to college debt-free. But making sure our students get a far better deal on their loans is a crucial first step.

https://martinomalley.com/the-latest/op-ed/debt-free-college/

[jkbRN]

9. Honest question,

Does capping loan payments ensure debt-free college? I haven't looked into it and I have a headache lolol sorry

[elleng]

13. several pieces:

'We froze tuition at public four-year institutions; Congress must allow students to refinance the debt they already have; cap the monthly payments on students’ loans, so that students whose passion is teaching or policing or national service can pursue their dreams without worrying about debt or default; make income-based repayment automatic; all low- and middle-income students enrolled in the programs should have their minimum monthly loan payments capped at 10 percent of their take-home pay; all borrowers who take advantage of these programs would eventually have the balance on their loan forgiven. These two proposals – letting students refinance their loans, and capping their loan payments – will go a long way toward relieving student debt.

To be sure, to end the student debt crisis for good we have to make college affordable for everyone. We can’t afford to make loans easier to pay off, only to have colleges keep raising tuition costs. And we must hold colleges that receive federal aid dollars accountable for directing aid toward the students who need it most — by tying the receipt of aid to schools’ performance on that score, or rewarding schools that excel at making college affordable.

Our ultimate goal must be for every student, most especially low-income and middle-class students, to be able to go to college debt-free. But making sure our students get a far better deal on their loans is a crucial first step.'

[jkbRN]

21. So, it's not debt free?

[elleng]

23. It is not magically debt free immediately.

'Our ultimate goal must be for every student, most especially low-income and middle-class students, to be able to go to college debt-free. But making sure our students get a far better deal on their loans is a crucial first step.'

https://martinomalley.com/the-latest/op-ed/debt-free-college/

[jkbRN]

24. I see, the title of your first comment is

"Martin O'Malley, DEBT FREE COLLEGE"

No need to mislead.

[elleng]

29. Yes, that's how the campaign labels it.

I promoted it as additional to Sanders' and HRC's plans, the only ones mentioned in the OP: 'Sanders vs. Clinton: Who Has the Best Plan for America's College Students?' as if they are the only ones.

[jkbRN]

32. I am the OP,

And all of the text is taken from the source of the article, and yes the title, too.

If anything is in the article that is misstated, people have the right to correct them--as I did with your post about OMalley.

[elleng]

35. Yes, you are! Sorry I didn't recognize that!

[jkbRN]

38. No worries! I've always liked omalleys plan

He's definitely my second choice. I respect what he has been taking about as well as his policy plans (on numerous issues). Also, I know it sounds weird but I have always thought that he's a great orator and gives off good body language. (I can't stand HRCs speaking style and body language..not to mention her proposals).

[elleng]

39. Glad you like his plan.

I do like his style of presenting himself and his plans, over that of HRC and Bernie, but wonder sometimes if too many voters avoid his detail/study/policies, and cool presentation, as too complex for them to grasp quickly.

[Autumn]

4. Pick a plan, pick an issue. No matter what it is Bernie wins, hands down.

[Uncle Joe]

5. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, jkbRN.

[hifiguy]

6. Yet another issue where both Sanders and O'Malley

put HRH to shame.

[upaloopa]

7. The President does not write tax policy

Bernie's free education relys on taxing Wall Street. Hell will freeze over before a college student will receive free education during a Sanders administration.
It is easy to say free education for all like in high school when class president candidates promise beer in all the drinking fountains.
Hillary has a plan that will effect people in a positive way while she is President.

Tax Wall Street and give everyone free education. Simple but not doable until we controll both Houses of Congress and the Supreme Court.

[jkbRN]

11. I would rather fight for a plan that I believe in

Rather than get yet another bad deal, that can manipulated.

The Clinton plan is unnecessarily complicated and difficult to administer. It leaves a number of key questions open to manipulation by future politicians, such as: What are the thresholds for paying part of the tuition? What's a reasonable percent of family income to pay into the program?

The principles behind the Clinton plan seem closer to some of the Republican candidates' ideas than they do to those of great Democratic presidents like Franklin D. Roosevelt. Chris Christie, for example, wants to cut Social Security benefits for Americans earning over $80,000.

Another conservative group, the Concord Coalition, proposed that Social Security benefits be cut for any family whose annual income exceeds $40,000 per year - and that includes both Social Security benefits and the cash value of their Medicare protection!

That's the problem with ideas like these. Once the door is open, there's always the possibility that politicians will use them to shift costs to the middle class.

In my mind, her plan is unacceptable.

[upaloopa]

15. Fine eat pie in the sky

Mean while we will get things done for people

[ibegurpard]

18. for people...

Who depend on the interest that is crushing students with debt.
Nope.
It's time to start thinking about the forgotten people and not those that populate the revolving doors between Wall Street and Washington.

[jkbRN]

22. Yes, I vote based on ideas

And Hillary has horrible "liberal" policies ideas, therefore I will not support her.

[upaloopa]

46. I say this a lot here. We all look st the same

thing and see different things.

[jeff47]

14. Clinton's plan also requires Congress.

Hillary has a plan that will effect people in a positive way while she is President.

Well, first she'd need Congressional approval.

And second, her plan is to put students further into debt. So unless you think early training in juggling debts is positive...

[upaloopa]

17. Hillary's plan has a better chance of getting through

Congress.

Saying the word "free" solves all your problems. It is a lazy way to tackle real issues.

[jeff47]

20. No, zero is the same as zero.

Saying the word "free" solves all your problems. It is a lazy way to tackle real issues.

Constructing strawmen based on your poor understanding of your opponents position is the lazy way to discuss real issues.

Clinton's plan puts students into a worse economic position, and incentives higher tuition - if students can take out more debt, that's more they can pay in tuition.

[riversedge]

26. Clinton wants to 'bend the cost curve' in higher education-Hillary Clinton’s college affordability p

I like lots of Hillary's plan. I think this article is a realistic one (not like the OP which editorializes a lot and tries to convince all that Sander's plan is A+.



http://www.vox.com/2015/8/10/9125349/hillary-clinton-college



Hillary Clinton’s college affordability plan, explained

Updated by Libby Nelson on August 10, 2015, 7:50 a.m. ET @libbyanelson [e-mail]


.....Clinton wants to 'bend the cost curve' in higher education

The Clinton campaign consulted Udacity's Sebastian Thrun, as well as many former Obama administration officials, in writing its plan.

A goal of Clinton's plan, according to a senior policy adviser in an interview Sunday, is to "bend the cost curve." That means lowering the cost of actually providing the education, not just shifting who pays for it.

Creating a state grant program aimed at lowering tuition at public universities is the centerpiece of Clinton's proposal. Clinton is calling for spending roughly $175 billion over 10 years on grants to states to lower tuition.

In order to qualify for the money, colleges would have to promise to set tuition rates so that students can afford them without taking out loans. It doesn't promise that students will graduate debt-free — room and board and other living expenses often cost more than tuition at state universities.

Still, cheaper tuition would mean students could use more of their federal aid, like Pell Grants, to cover living expenses. And Clinton has called for additional money for colleges that work to lower living costs for students from low- and middle-income families, so that they don't have to borrow as much in order to graduate...................

[jkbRN]

27. You are like living in a fantasy world

If you think republicans will pass ANYTHING that Hillary wants. Regardless of policy. Look at Obama, I would say that the right wing attacks on Hillary are far worse--Bernie has a much better chance of working across the aisle.

[PosterChild]

43. Personally , I think bernie is a

... made for TV right wing target . IMHO, working across the aisle will not work for him.

[Bill USA]

8. how refreshing. at last a pro Bernie post that doesn't involve screaming HRC is a demon from Hell.

I congratulate you!

[Hoyt]

10. Somebody has to pay for it. I have no problem with families that can afford it paying.

Obviously, how that is determined is important, as is what help is available for those who can't afford an education without significant help.

I also think we need control of escalating tuition.

Like many of Sanders' "proposals," I don't think there is much chance he can get it passed any time soon.

IMO, Clinton has a better chance of getting something effective enacted.

But, I understand wanting significant change. So if Sanders is the Nominee, I'll support him.

[jeff47]

12. So make those families pay via taxes.

There's no particular reason you have to all it "tuition" instead of "taxes". Money is fungible, after all.

I also think we need control of escalating tuition.

IMO, Clinton has a better chance of getting something effective enacted.

Considering Clinton's plan is to make it easier to get further into debt, these two statements are contradictory.

[Hoyt]

19. I think woth either candidates plan, wealthier people would have to pay mire in taxed.

Of course education is only one thing those taxes need to fund, other things include healthcare, shoring up Social Security, food stamps, welfare, jobs, unemployment insurance, mental health, infrastructure improvements, etc.

I applaud Sanders for proposing these wonderful things. I guess that's an important step. But he has to pull it off within today's political realities. That's where he loses me.

Escalating tuition is a problem, that increases debt.

[jkbRN]

30. Do you really think congress would pass anything that Hillary wants?

LMAO!!! Of the republicans despise Obama, they must HATEEEEEE Hillary. Look at the way they talk about her. This is a reality.

[Hoyt]

33. She's practical enough to get something of value, even if she has to threaten

to show photos. Sanders would rather wave his arms for 4 years, and get nothing.

[TheKentuckian]

40. If you have the photos then you go for the deal you want or probably even better

in the long term, you show the photos and flog them to get rid of the folks that are the problem.

You've got jack apple shit. You are literally bothering to argue that your magic beans are more realistic because they won't work as well if they were to sprout.

It is really sad that conservative and ineffective is how too many folks measure realistic in the United States of America.

[riversedge]

16. Richard (RJ) is a writer and editor with the Bernie 2016 campaign,

FYI


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rj-eskow/
Richard (RJ) Eskow
RSS Feed
GET UPDATES FROM Richard (RJ) Eskow
Like
1.2k
Richard (RJ) is a writer and editor with the Bernie 2016 campaign, a Senior Fellow with the Campaign for America’s Future and the host of The Zero Hour, a weekly radio program. Richard is a former consultant, public policy advisor, and senior executive with work experience in the US and more than 20 foreign countries. His writings have appeared in a number of print and digital publications.

[beam me up scottie]

25. K & R!!!

[BlueWaveDem]

28. Can we see Sanders plan?

[Evergreen Emerald]

31. Sounds like a biased interpretation

I would actually like to see the plans themselves rather than have a pundit attempt to sway me with editorial comments.


And, of course Clinton learned through her experience that it takes steps to change, just like Obama's health care initiative that can be adjusted and strengthened. Conversely, Sanders wants to give you the moon--with insufficient explanation on how to pay for it.

"I will give every American 150,000 dollars if I am President." Ok. how?

[Hoyt]

36. +1. Again, I applaud him for wanting to do those things. He's just not realistic.

[Thinkingabout]

34. Hum, seems like Bernie's plan helps the 1%, funny how that works, everyone getting free college,

all the rich kids who parents can afford to send them to college, welfare for those who do not need the free college. So far I have not seen a plan to pay for all this free college entirely.

[Fearless]

37. Sanders clearly!

[Paka]

41. K&R

No matter what policy comparrison, Sanders wins hands down.

[skepticscott]

42. Sanders clearly has a better GOAL

But politicians tend to try muddle "plans" and "goals" in the mind of the voting public. Free tuition for all students at public universities is a goal, not a plan. Goals are judged by their desirability, while plans are judged by their achievability, both in theory and in practice. There has to be more than saying "this plan will work if everyone just agrees how great it is".

[PosterChild]

44. +100 !! (NT)

[Spitfire of ATJ]

45. Hillary is just trying to teach those lazy poor people the work ethic.