AOC's Warning for Democrats: 'We're in Trouble'
(snip)
As a younger member of Congress, the first vote I ever cast was for Barack Obama, who was called a socialist and all of this stuff. All of this rhetoric that we see today has been the political reality my entire life. And so I never felt a nostalgia for something that never existed in my lifetime, she told me. I feel like our politics has fundamentally changed whether its for better or for worse is for peoples determination but I was never under the illusion that we can bring Manchin along.
Ocasio-Cortez was one one of only six Democrats (including Representative Jamaal Bowman of the Bronx) to vote against Bidens $1.2 trillion infrastructure bill last November. She reasoned correctly, it turned out that severing the infrastructure spending from Bidens much larger Build Back Better proposal would allow the bigger bill to be killed, in the closely divided Senate, by the defection of two conservative Democratic senators, Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema.
(snip)
We need to acknowledge that this isnt just about middle of the road, an increasingly narrow band of independent voters. This is really about the collapse of support among young people, among the Democratic base, who are feeling that they worked overtime to get this president elected and arent necessarily being seen, she said.
Ocasio-Cortez and the other 97 members of the House Progressive Caucus are calling on Biden to issue executive orders to enact environmental protections, lower health-care costs, cancel federal student-loan debts, and expand protections for immigrants.
(snip)
https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2022/03/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-i-was-right-about-joe-manchin.html
NewHendoLib
(59,940 posts)Right wing has megaphones. We have a transistor radio.
Uncle Joe
(58,109 posts)Reich Wing this fall and beyond.
CBS News has named former Trump White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney as a network contributor, announcing the hiring of the ex-director of the Office of Management and Budget on air Tuesday morning. Youre the guy to ask about this, CBS News anchor Anne-Marie Green said while introducing Mulvaney during a segment criticizing the Biden administrations plan to raise taxes on billionaires. CBS News hiring of Mulvaney raises the number of former President Donald Trumps chiefs of staff on their payroll to two, as they brought on Reince Priebus as a political analyst in 2020. Mulvaney joining the network has already raised eyebrows, especially from progressives, largely due to his checkered record with the Trump administration. Before walking back his comments and claiming the press misconstrued them, Mulvaney told reporters to get over it on whether Trump sought a quid pro quo from Ukraine in 2019. There is going to be political influence in foreign policy, he added, seemingly admitting Trump held up military aid to pressure Ukraines president to meddle in the 2020 election. Additionally, at the start of the coronavirus pandemic, Mulvaney waved off concerns while suggesting it was all just part of the medias hoax of the day to hurt Trumps presidency. Even after Trump lost the 2020 election, Mulvaney insisted the outgoing president would concede gracefully and slammed press outlets that worried Trump would not participate in a peaceful transition of powera position that obviously did not age well.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/cbs-news-hires-ex-trump-chief-of-staff-mick-mulvaney-who-told-media-to-get-over-it-on-ukraine
NewHendoLib
(59,940 posts)TheRealNorth
(9,435 posts)Good luck getting college loans forgiven if Trump and the Republicans are re-installed. The Republicans are more likely to bring back debtor's prisons then they are to forgive your loans.
gab13by13
(20,864 posts)maybe moderates can repeal it?
I have a question for you?
President Biden wants to tax the rich in the budget bill, he wants them to pay a minimum tax. But wait, he wants to tax their wealth and not their income. My question to you, Are you in favor of this?
Before you answer, remember this, Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren have been trying to do something very similar for years. So before you answer, remember, most likely Bernie, Liz, and AOC are going to be in favor of this tax.
LetMyPeopleVote
(143,999 posts)President Biden does not have the power to cancel student debt
Link to tweet
https://www.forbes.com/sites/prestoncooper2/2021/08/30/no-biden-cant-forgive-student-loans-by-executive-order/?sh=7f9036433b2b
But as financial aid expert Mark Kantrowitz notes, another part of the statute limits the secretarys authority. He only has the power to cancel obligations owed to the U.S. government in the performance of, and with respect to, the functions, powers, and duties, vested in him by this part.
In other words, the Secretary of Education only has the power to forgive student debt when Congress gives it to him.
When President Biden has canceled student debt, it has always been under the authority of a specific program authorized by Congress. Borrower defense is one example: Congress gives the Secretary of Education authority to cancel debt after instances of outright fraud. Congress also allows the secretary to cancel debt when borrowers experience a total and permanent disability. Borrowers who work in public service for ten years can also receive a loan discharge.
In each of these circumstances, Congress created a specific provision for loan cancelation, and required borrowers to meet certain conditions before receiving forgiveness. If the Secretary really had the broad authority to cancel student loans whenever he saw fit, Congress wouldnt need to create specific programs such as Public Service Loan Forgiveness. The very existence of those programs proves the limits of the executive branchs authority.....
The debate over whether the President Biden can cancel student debt with the flick of his pen is a distraction. He cant, but there are better solutions on the table. Congress and the Department of Education should work together to put them into practice.
If you want to cancel student loans, draft a bill and get it thrugh Congress
gab13by13
(20,864 posts)LetMyPeopleVote
(143,999 posts)The first is for people who attended bogus for profit schools that defrauded them. That debt needed to be cancelled due to fraud. The second type is for students who preform public service after graduation. For example, the child of a friend is working for a state agency that is covered by this program and is on track to have a significant portion of student loans cancelled.
Link to tweet
Biden is changing the rules for forgiveness of debt for public service.
Link to tweet
See https://www.cnn.com/2022/03/09/politics/student-loan-public-service-forgiveness-waiver/index.html
The cancellations for those people are expected to total about $6.2 billion in federal student debt relief. Not all of the eligible borrowers have been notified of their debt relief yet. They are being notified on a rolling basis, and the Department of Education could not provide a date when all of them will have been contacted.
The announcement marks the latest effort by the Biden administration to make it easier for some borrowers to qualify for loan forgiveness under existing programs. But the administration's piecemeal approach still falls short of the President's campaign pledge to support canceling $10,000 for each of the roughly 43 million people who currently hold federal student loan debt.
The Public Service Loan Forgiveness program promises to wipe away remaining federal student loan debt after an eligible public service worker makes 10 years of monthly payments. It was created about 15 years ago, but a very small percentage of people who applied had received forgiveness before 2021.
bottomofthehill
(8,261 posts)Defunding the Police, Self Identifying as a Socialist Democrat, Eliminating student debt........ Not really main stream issue
We are in trouble
gab13by13
(20,864 posts)President Biden already canceled 6.2 billion of student debt. I guess that makes our president a Socialist Democrat.
CentralMass
(15,265 posts)gab13by13
(20,864 posts)There are cities who have actually implemented the real purpose behind this. Police officers aren't being called out for certain types of 911 calls and the results are very positive.
LetMyPeopleVote
(143,999 posts)This article explains why Democrats did poorly in the 2020 elections.
Link to tweet
Heres what Rep. Harley Rouda (D-Calif.), who lost, told The Washington Post: Many [voters], I believe, bought into the message that Democrats are marching in that direction [of socialism], and that was a false narrative. I would tell you, the Democratic Party, in my opinion, is more moderate than it has ever been. We did not combat that message as effectively as we should have.
My opponent only talked about three words: Defund the police, Democrat Cameron Webb said on a private call this week, Politico reported. He lost what Democrats hoped was a winnable race in Virginia.
Im not sure that as a party we took that attack head on, and provided our counter narrative, Rep. Stephanie Murphy (D-Fla.) told Politico of socialist attacks resonating with Hispanic voters in Florida, costing Democrats two House seats. Its not enough to say what youre not, you have to define what you are. And we have to define it in a way that doesnt scare the American people.
[T]he [liberal] rhetoric and the policies and all that stuff it has gone way too far, Rep. Conor Lamb (D-Pa.) told the New York Times. It needs to be dialed back. It needs to be rooted in common sense, in reality, and yes, politics. Because we need districts like mine to stay in the majority and get something done for the people that we care about the most.
Peregrine Took
(7,408 posts)From 2016 article:
"For the last 40 years, whenever a Democratic presidential hopeful has given off the slightest whiff of leftish anti-establishmentarianism, party leaders and mainstream pundits have invoked McGoverns name. In 2004, Howard Dean was the new McGovern. In 2008, Barack Obama became the new McGovern. This year, its Bernie Sanderss turn.
But the Democrats fear of McGovernism is misplaced. McGovern didnt lose because he was too far to the left. He lost because he was facing a popular incumbent presiding over a booming economy. Moreover, the Democrats belief that they need to steer clear of McGovernism, assuming it was ever correct, now looks increasingly misguided. With each passing decade, the types of voters drawn to McGoverns 1972 campaign have become a larger and larger share of the American electorate, while the issues championed by McGovern have become more and more salient.
Introductory offer: 50% off fearless reporting.
https://newrepublic.com/article/130737/democrats-still-dont-get-george-mcgovern
Uncle Joe
(58,109 posts)appalachiablue
(41,049 posts)LetMyPeopleVote
(143,999 posts)czarjak
(11,191 posts)Hoyt
(54,770 posts)Uncle Joe
(58,109 posts)I'm all about the issues, policies; their effects on our society and Earth, whether those results be today or long after my expiration date.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)Uncle Joe
(58,109 posts)JohnSJ
(91,944 posts)extremists. The DSA sure didn't share that sentiment.
She "reasoned correctly". No way. What she reasoned was the same nonsense that it was better to pass nothing then something. That was the same argument used by much of the same people who pushed not to pass the ACA.
It is the logic used by some in 2016 who argued that there was no difference between Democrats and republicans, and the Supreme Court really didn't matter.
Just take the argument that Biden should forgive "student loans" by executive order.
The reality is the executive branch has no authority to cancel student debt unless Congress says so.
When President Biden has canceled parts of student debt, it always was under the authority of a specific program authorized by Congress.
It is up to Congress if they want to authorize universal loan forgiveness, not the President by executive order. If Biden did that by executive order, it would be immediately challenged, and lost in the courts.
Of course, there we go again with the threats. If you don't do this, you will lose the support of the "young people"
That worked out real well in 2016 didn't it.
Not only did we lose 3 Supreme Court Seats, but we are very close to losing our democracy because of that nonesense.
Let me remind some that in 2016, in every critical swing states, Hillary lost by less than 1%. In those critical swing states, Jill Stein received 1% of the vote. That along with the Nina Turner's, David Sirota's, Brihana Joy Gray's, etc. encouraging people to not vote for the Democratic party nominee worked out real well for us.
If they plan to play the same game in the midterms, and 2024, we pay an even bigger price
A reminder, the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) recently claimed that United States imperialism was partly to blame for the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
While the DSA condemned Russian actions, at the same time they called for the US to withdraw from Nato and end the imperialist expansionism that set the stage for this conflict.
Ignoring the fact that NATO is a defensive organization, and it was Russia that decided to invade Ukraine
gab13by13
(20,864 posts)how president Biden canceled 6.2 billion of student debt?
https://www.forbes.com/sites/zackfriedman/2022/03/09/biden-will-cancel-62-billion-in-student-loans-through-changes-to-student-loan-forgiveness/?sh=526317ad93f4
As far as AOC voting against the infrastructure bill, she did so as a protest to failing to pass president Biden's signature piece of legislation, the BBB bill.
If I remember correctly, Speaker Pelosi was on the same side as AOC, I remember she tied the 2 bills together and held out as long as she could until she realized that moderate Democrats were not going to pass BBB. Speaker Pelosi and AOC were both correct what would happen.
Another moderate Democrat, Joe Lieberman cost us the public option for Obamacare.
JohnSJ
(91,944 posts)Pelosi tied the two bills together because it was the only way to get things moving, because the progressive caucus refused to vote for anything unless that was done.
When it was realized that it wouldn't roll in the Senate with Manchin and Sinema, she did the prudent thing, to have something rather than nothing.
As for Rep. Ocasio-Cortez's "protest", was that the excuse for her voting with republicans against aid to Ukraine also?
For the ACA, it wasn't just Lieberman. There were several Democrats in the Senate who had issues. Lincoln, Nelson in Florida, Nelson in Nebraska, Bayh, Liberman, and pryor.
The ACA barely passed as it was:
The U.S. House of Representatives was safely Democratic as a result of the Nov. 4, 2008, elections by a margin of 257 199; the Democrats had gained 21 seats from the 2006-07 Congress. The real interesting ACA political dynamics began during the November 2008 U.S. Senate elections.
Going into the 2008 elections, the Senate consisted of 49 Democrats, 49 Republicans, and two Independents (Joe Lieberman of Connecticut and Bernie Sanders of Vermont) who caucused with the Democrats. When the smoke cleared from those elections, the Democrats picked up eight seats to increase their majority to 57-41 (although Democrat Al Frankens recount victory was not official until July 7). With the two Independents, the Democrats were one vote shy of the supermajority magic number of 60 they needed to ward off any filibuster attempts and move forward with broad healthcare reform legislation.
On April 28, 2009, the dynamics changed when Pennsylvania Republican Arlen Spector changed parties, giving Senate Democrats that coveted 60th vote.
Now the Democrats had a safe majority in the House and a filibuster-proof supermajority of 60 in the Senate. That scenario lasted only four months before fate intervened. Sen. Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts died on August 25, 2009, leaving the Democrats, once again, with 59 seats (counting the two Independents). Exactly one month later, on September 25, Democrat Paul Kirk was appointed interim senator from Massachusetts to serve until the special election set for January 19, 2010 once again giving the Democrats that 60th vote. But the intrigue was just beginning.
There didnt seem to be an urgent need for Democrats to reconcile both bills immediately, because the Massachusetts special election (scheduled for January 19, 2010) was almost certain to fall to the Democrat, Attorney General Martha Coakley. After all, no Republican had been elected to the U.S. Senate from the Bay State since Edward Brooke in 1972 38 years before! But in yet another twist of fate, Republican Scott Brown ran his campaign as the 41st senator against ObamaCare and shocked nearly everyone by winning the special election by 110,000 votes.
That left House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and President Obama in a dilemma. Everyone assumed that the Christmas Eve 2009 Senate bill would be tweaked considerably to conform more with the House bill passed two months previously. But now that strategy wouldnt work, because the Democrats no longer had the 60th vote in the Senate to end debate. What to do? They decided to have the House take up the identical bill that the Senate passed on Christmas Eve. It passed on March 21, 2010, by a 219 212 vote. This time, no Republicans came on board, and 34 Democrats voted against. President Obama signed the ACA legislation two days later on March 23.
The rancor has not abated since, as we all know. Republicans invoked Thomas Jeffersons observation that great innovations should not be forced on a slender majority or enacted without broad support. They cited broad legislative innovations like Social Security and Medicare, both of which enjoyed bipartisan support. They complained that one fewer vote in the Senate or a change of four votes in the House would have been enough to defeat ObamaCare. Democrats responded just as vociferously and passionately that this healthcare reform package was too important and overdue to delay or compromise.
I don't think many realize just how close, and what it took to pass the ACA.
gab13by13
(20,864 posts)made changes in the loan program that allowed student debt to be forgiven. No it wasn't done by executive order, but it was done without passing Congressional bills.
The U.S. Department of Education has identified 100,000 student loan borrowers who are now eligible for student loan cancellation due to the changes the Biden administration made to the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program in October. In aggregate, these student loan borrowers will get $6.2 billion in student loan cancellation. The Education Department is notifying these student loan borrowers of their eligibility for student loan forgiveness, as CNN reported. Ultimately, the Education Department says that 550,000 student loan borrowers will get student loan forgiveness sooner due to these changes.
The statement was made that the president can't forgive student loans without going before Congress, well the Biden administration just did.
JohnSJ
(91,944 posts)loans unless previously authorized by Congress.
The loans forgiven so far as I understand it, are limited under existing programs
lapucelle
(18,037 posts)Here are some new and upcoming changes to the federal student loan forgiveness program for public service.
The U.S. Department of Education has announced some changes to make the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program easier to navigate and to extend forgiveness to student loan borrowers who previously did not qualify.
Under PSLF, federal student loan borrowers can receive loan forgiveness in exchange for 10 years of work in a public service field. That may sound simple, but meeting the detailed requirements has proven more complicated than many realized. To qualify for PSLF, borrowers must have the right type of loan, be enrolled in a qualifying repayment plan and make 120 qualifying on-time payments while working full time at a qualifying public service organization.
https://www.usnews.com/education/blogs/student-loan-ranger/articles/updates-to-public-service-loan-forgiveness
JohnSJ
(91,944 posts)lapucelle
(18,037 posts)The Department of Education broadened its eligibility rules for the Public Service Loan Forgiveness Program.
Under PSLF, federal student loan borrowers can receive loan forgiveness in exchange for 10 years of work in a public service field.
https://www.usnews.com/education/blogs/student-loan-ranger/articles/updates-to-public-service-loan-forgiveness
lapucelle
(18,037 posts)It wasn't done through an executive order, and (notwithstanding the Forbes headline) the debt wasn't cancelled.
Under the new rules, more borrowers will be eligible to have their loans forgiven after 10 years of working in public service.
Today, the U.S. Department of Education announced an overhaul of the Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF) Program that it will implement over the next year to make the program live up to its promise. This policy will result in 22,000 borrowers who have consolidated loansincluding previously ineligible loansbeing immediately eligible for $1.74 billion in forgiveness without the need for further action on their part. Another 27,000 borrowers could potentially qualify for an additional $2.82 billion in forgiveness if they certify additional periods of employment. All told, the Department estimates that over 550,000 borrowers who have previously consolidated will see an increase in qualifying payments with the average borrower receiving another two years of progress toward forgiveness. Many more will also see progress as borrowers consolidate into the Direct Loan program and apply for PSLF, and as the Department rolls out other changes in the weeks and months ahead.
Borrowers who devote a decade of their lives to public service should be able to rely on the promise of Public Service Loan Forgiveness. The system has not delivered on that promise to date, but that is about to change for many borrowers who have served their communities and their country, said U.S. Secretary of Education Miguel Cardona. Teachers, nurses, first responders, service members, and so many public service workers have had our back especially amid the challenges of the pandemic. Today, the Biden Administration is showing that we have their backs, too.
https://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/us-department-education-announces-transformational-changes-public-service-loan-forgiveness-program-will-put-over-550000-public-service-workers-closer-loan-forgiveness
sheshe2
(83,324 posts)Thank you, lapucelle.
LetMyPeopleVote
(143,999 posts)This is a good set of changes that the Biden administration can adopt without legislation
Link to tweet
Through the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program, the government forgives remaining federal student loan debt for qualifying public-sector workers after they have made monthly payments for 10 years.
But the program has long been criticized for being difficult to navigate, with borrowers receiving little help from their loan servicers, the companies that handle billing and other services. Many borrowers have said they found out they weren't eligible for forgiveness only after making what they thought were a decade's worth of qualifying payments.
In an announcement Wednesday, the Education Department said it will "restore the promise" of the debt relief program through a series of actions that will be implemented "over the coming months," according to an agency memo.
Joe Biden does not have the power to cancel student debt except in cases of fraud or under this program set forth above
lapucelle
(18,037 posts)and not enough actual work being done and that not everybody will go along with whomever the pronoun "we" stands for.
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/biden-congress-votes/house/
sheshe2
(83,324 posts)LetMyPeopleVote
(143,999 posts)In the articles discussing the cancellation of student debt by magic or executive order, I came across an issue that has been pestering me. What is to be done on future student loan debt and how will persons who were responsible and pay off their student loans be treated. I was on scholarship in law school but still had to borrow some money. I paid off that loan many decades ago. My son was offered a full scholarship to one law school but went to a higher ranked law school. He paid off his student debt a long time ago. Another child is on track to have her student debt cancelled by working for a public agency.
As noted above, the current proposals will not help people who were responsible and repaid their student loans or people who will incure debt in the future. https://www.forbes.com/sites/zackfriedman/2022/02/04/democrats-tweet-that-student-loans-should-be-cancelled-but-twitter-claps-back/?sh=5117abf23abd
What will be done for such persons under these plans.
As for executive action, I remind you that the SCOTUS struck down Biden's OSHA rules for employers of 100 or more employees either being tested or vaccinated. The case on this issue is clear and that proposal should had been upheld by the SCOTUS. I seriously doubt that the SCOTUS would uphold the forgiveness of a very large amount of student debt by executive order in the real world. How do you propose getting around this problem in the real world?
I would love someone to explain how this works in the real world.
sheshe2
(83,324 posts)LetMyPeopleVote
(143,999 posts)I have posed these questions on at least one thread on DU and got no answer. Forbes and other publications have raised these questions and have been ignored.
Again, it may be that the persons pushing the concept that student debt can be forgiven by executive order know that this claim is false and so do not want to deal with real world issues. It is easy to argue for a magic forgiveness of student debt when you know that such plan can not work in the real world without legislation