[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 6, 2005)]
[House]
[Pages H11074-H11075]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                 THE FEDERAL BUDGET AND COLLEGE TUITION

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, at 2 a.m. before Congress adjourned a 
couple of weeks ago, we passed something called the reconciliation 
bill, theoretically the first attempt to begin to deal with the flood 
of red ink that is drowning our Nation. But these were kind of mean-
spirited cuts that hit at those who really can't afford to give too 
much in order to protect the very wealthy.
  Here is how it worked. The biggest single category of cuts in that 
bill was $14.3 billion out of student loans. On the Republican side, 
they said, We didn't cut student loans. All we did was increase the 
cost of student loans. Well, it is the same impact on the students. 
They are going to double the origination fee on the student loans, they 
are going to charge students a fee to fix the rate, and they are going 
to give them a really high fixed interest rate instead of the rather 
reasonable rate that is available now. It is estimated for the average 
Oregonian going to a public school who borrows the maximum amount for 4 
years, they will incur another $5,800 in loan costs.
  I went out to see what the students in Oregon thought about this and 
how they were doing. I was inspired. I went to the University of Oregon 
and Oregon State both, met with student government leaders and regular 
students who are getting financial aid. The stories were inspiring, 
what these young people are doing to try and better themselves. There 
was one couple, they had both been displaced workers. They have a 
child. They went through Lane Community College to get associate's 
degrees because it was cheaper and they borrowed $40,000 to do it. They 
are now at the U of O. They estimate they will graduate with over 
$100,000 in debt. There was the young woman who is holding three jobs, 
three jobs, and 14 credit hours. She said, Congressman, I'm going to 
have to reduce my credit hours. You know what that means. It's going to 
take me longer to finish school, which means I'm going to have to 
borrow more money.
  They said, when you were young and you went to school, and I think a 
lot of the Republicans have not thought about this maybe, you could 
take a summer job and save enough money to pay tuition at a public 
school. That was true. They said, If we get a summer job and save 
really well, we get just about enough money to buy our books. You can 
work full-time year round at a minimum wage job in Oregon where the 
minimum wage is considerably higher than the Federal minimum wage and 
still not have enough money to eat and pay your tuition, let alone your 
housing costs.
  This is a dire situation. The response of the Republicans is that 
these are the people who should sacrifice. These are the people who can 
afford to pay more to help rein in the reckless, wanton spending and 
debt being piled up on that side of the aisle. What is the trade-off 
the Republicans want? They are going to take the $14.3 billion that 
these students will have to pay in additional costs, many of them will 
probably have to give up on getting a higher education and just go to 
work in a dead-end job, and they are going to give it to the richest 
among us. It is

[[Page H11075]]

going to continue the tax cuts for people who are lucky enough to clip 
coupons off of stocks, dividends. The trade-off is almost exact.
  So students will pay more for their loans, kids who are trying to get 
ahead, start a life, start a family, do better, become productive 
citizens, have a good living and pay taxes so that the richest among us 
will not have to pay taxes on their investments. But under their 
bizarre theory of trickle-down economics, somehow those students and 
everybody else is going to benefit by the fact that the richest among 
us, those who live off dividends on stocks, will pay a lower rate of 
taxes. What a bizarre view of the world from that side of the aisle. 
What a mean-spirited cut.

                              {time}  1945

  I wonder how many people from that side of the aisle went and talked 
to students about this during the break. They probably went to the 
country club and chortled with the rich people over champagne after 
Thanksgiving dinner, but they did not go out and talk to the students 
who they are sticking it to nor the seniors who they are sticking it to 
in this bill or the hungry primary and secondary school kids whose 
school lunch programs they are cutting. Those are the people who have 
to sacrifice so the richest among us can have their tax cuts continue.
  Last year, according to the Internal Revenue Service, 99 percent of 
the people in America saw their incomes decline in real dollars. One 
percent saw an increase, those over $300,000; and they did not even do 
really that well. It is only 4 percent for between $300,000 and 1.3 
million, but the people over 1.3 million, the people that these 
students are going to pay for their tax cuts, they saw a 10 percent 
increase in their income.
  There is something wrong here when we have young people working hard, 
trying to get ahead, and we are saying you are going to pay for the 
rich folks' free ride.

                          ____________________