2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumBernie and Hillary Join Forces To Release "Revolutionary" Free College Plan
Clinton famously criticized Sanderss plan by saying, I am not in favor of making college free for Donald Trumps kids. In other words, she did not want to introduce universal free tuition because it would amount to a government subsidy for the rich who dont need one.
Now Clinton has adopted some of Sanderss free tuition pledges; she will make tuition free for around 80% of Americans but introduce an income cap on free tuition so the richest Americans still have to pay by making in-state colleges and university free for students from families making $85,000 a year or less. That income threshold would then climb by $10,000 a year until 2021, when in-state schools would then be free to all families who make $125,000 or less. She reiterated her original promises to close tax loopholes and use the $350 billion saved over a ten year period to refinance student debt to unprecedented low interest rates. She also says she will make it impossible for the government to profit off of student loans.
http://occupydemocrats.com/2016/07/06/just-bernie-hillary-join-forces-release-revolutionary-free-college-plan/
one_voice
(20,043 posts)sounds great. I want to read it. I hope they have something for students that are currently drowning in debt too.
This is what I want to see. The two together...unbeatable. Add the rest of the Dems and we're golden.
Trump and the repukes can go to hell. We'll kick ass up and down the ticket.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)Note Sanders' "make life immediately better" comment near the bottom. It suggests details not mentioned here.
Clinton also plans to use executive action to provide a three-month moratorium on student loan repayments for federal borrowers. The "time-out" would give students a chance to work with the U.S. Department of Education to consolidate their loans and reduce their monthly payments.
The plan received an uncharacteristically warm embrace from Sanders, who has so far declined to formally endorse her. Sanders was supported during the primary by the overwhelming majority of young voters, who often cited his promise of universal free tuition at public institutions. Clinton previously had offered a more limited plan for debt-free college. Her new plan does not go as far as Sanders, whose plan included no income limit, but moves significantly in his direction.
In a sign that Sanders and Clinton are increasingly aligning as the party prepares for its convention later this month in Philadelphia, the Vermont senator said the proposals are "a result of the work of both campaigns." "This proposal, when implemented, will revolutionize the funding of higher education in America, improve the economic future of our country and make life immediately better for tens of millions of people stuck with high levels of student debt," Sanders said in the statement.
Dawson Leery
(19,348 posts)lonestarnot
(77,097 posts)liberalnarb
(4,532 posts)lonestarnot
(77,097 posts)woolldog
(8,791 posts)How does free college benefit children (mostly black and brown) who are stuck in primary and secondary schools that can't even begin to prepare them adequately for college? Who is disproportionately dropping out before even coming close to attending college? They will not be able to take advantage of this.
The money that is paying for this plan would be better off going to improving primary and secondary education. Instead this is like a pretty little band-aid on a gaping wound.
liberalnarb
(4,532 posts)There are different solutions for different issues.
woolldog
(8,791 posts)So I understand, although it's gotten much worse since I finished school.
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)I agree with you. New college grads coming out debt free competing with others with student debt levels higher than their yearly salaries. Will this put downward pressure on wages that have already been stagnant for a couple of decades?
I am hesitantly positive on the idea, for the moment.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)I didn't make it past eighth grade, yet managed to earn a Bachelors degree later on in life.
Are you saying not having a shot at college is better?
woolldog
(8,791 posts)might be better spent on "revolutionizing" primary and secondary education. The vast majority of poor inner city students are not at schools where they are being prepared for college. So the prospect of free college is cold comfort to those students who will not likely benefit from this plan. It will not improve their poor primary and secondary schools. This program amounts to a transfer of wealth out of inner city, academically struggling schools, to more affluent (but not wealthy) schools and school districts.
Just some food for thought.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)You are implying that free college is racist, and you are dead wrong on all points.
woolldog
(8,791 posts)free college should not be THE top priority. It's akin to spraying Lysol on a gangrenous limb.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)Similar to fdrs housing programs. They both will deepen some existing divides. Inner city secondary schools often suck, and are dangerous. Kids graduate HS without being prepared for HS, let alone college.
NWCorona
(8,541 posts)woolldog
(8,791 posts)in struggling schools? This will have the biggest beneficial impact, not free college. Those proposals are aimed at the bourgeoisie and winning their votes, not the poor.
NWCorona
(8,541 posts)this approach will have the most beneficial impact in the near term.
merrily
(45,251 posts)It's not either or. We can fix a problem at a time. And we can also fix more than one problem at a time.
Hillary is likely going for the vote of millennials that supported Bernie in the primary and thinking "free college" may have been how he got it.
Of course, college is not "free." Once the kids get out of school and get jobs, they'll pay taxes for those who come up behind them.
Meanwhile, you and I and others can be working on better public schools K-12 in all neighborhoods on both the local and state levels, as well as the national level.
woolldog
(8,791 posts)Money spent underwriting free college for the middle class is coming from somewhere else. And where the amount of money spent on education is limited, it is coming out of the education budget
merrily
(45,251 posts)from the same places that money for K-12 or roads or war comes. That's how society operates. And, as stated, once people graduate and get jobs, they started paying taxes, too. That also is how society operates.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)Very well maintained, well stocked and fully staffed.
It's shocking that in some of the hottest and expensive residential areas of NYC reside schools full of poor kids from Brooklyn and Harlem shoved forty in to a room and not given text books. Manhattan doesn't have enoug tax money? It's insane.
merrily
(45,251 posts)There's a SCOTUS case saying that you can't force a school distrisct to distribute school money equally when real estate taxes are by city or town.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Antonio_Independent_School_District_v._Rodriguez
However, that is an older case and the City of New York might be different. Also, the court held that education is not a fundamental right. However, the history of free education in this country says otherwise, at least to the US. All I can think of is that the case was presented poorly. One thing Thurgood Marshall did in the Brown v. Board of Ed case was produce indisputable evidence that separate was not equal, so that the equal protection clause was being violated for racial reasons. In New York, I think the Bronx, the ration of people of color to white people in the underserved parts of the city could raise a racial issue, too, but the lawyers for the plaintiff have to do the kind of work Marshall did for the Brown family--including picking the ideal plaintiff, as Marshall did with Mr. Brown.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)Something like the state did not owe everyone a good education ... Because some were destined to end up flipping burgers anyway. Quite sad.
MADem
(135,425 posts)Beverly Hills, frankly.
That's where the emphasis needs to be.
bettyellen
(47,209 posts)DemonGoddess
(4,640 posts)Dems2002
(509 posts)I am not going to suggest that k-12 doesn't require better solutions. But there is a lot of time and effort going into this as well. Personally. I think affordable, high quality childcare from 0-5 is essential to close gaps that last a lifetime.
But understand that black and brown students who go to college are currently overburdened by the cost as compared with white students. And this cost factors into many of the, dropping out Nd not completing degrees.
http://prospect.org/article/campaign-challenge-fix-african-american-student-loan-crisis
JustAnotherGen
(32,046 posts)And it leaves out the mechanically inclined who should graduate high school in 2023 prepared to charge the College Graduate with no student debt and a brand new condo and car $750 for an HVAC service call on a 95 degree day. Everyone has to make their money at other's expense. That's how commerce works.
I have noted though that she specifically notes 'high quality charter schools' which I *think* will allow parents in black/hispanic zip codes to bypass America and educate their children as they see fit. IE if the Elizabeth NJ school district or Camden NJ school district is failing to provide a Beverly Hills education - let the parents bypass the rest of us to do right by their children by grabbing tax payer funds to take over their schools.
Here's her K-12 Platform.
https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/k-12-education/
Waiting 5-10 years for her college grads to pay taxes leaves a huge group of people behind during that time. That's too late for a 4th grader in Camden NJ in 2016.
In her speech yesterday she should have attacked Trumps lapdog Christie for his flat tax per student plan that *supposedly* will lower property taxes across the board. In Atlantic City that would have been huge.
I'm okay with free college as long as she does not back down on charter schools. It gives the people the power.
quaker bill
(8,225 posts)when we easily have the resources to do both.
BobbyDrake
(2,542 posts)systemic racism will prevent benefits at all to minorities. This is why ignoring racism to focus exclusively on class is a non-starter with minority communities. They know their history, after all.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)nolawarlock
(1,729 posts)I didn't like either of their plans on the subject, frankly, but I like this. This is what happens when smart people join forces.
merrily
(45,251 posts)Cobalt Violet
(9,905 posts)John Poet
(2,510 posts)I can dig this.
lovemydog
(11,833 posts)I'm really proud of Sanders, Clinton and so many other great democrats who will support this wholeheartedly.
As someone who voted for Hillary in the primary, I'm really glad they're teaming up by concentrating on things that will move us all forward.
It's all about good strong policies that benefit the most people.
BigBearJohn
(11,410 posts)Orsino
(37,428 posts)And hear less from the voices who wanted to silence one candidate or the other. Together, we're stronger.