SENATE BILL: Independent Educational Institution Relief Act (Redraft Passed)

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

I object.

You completely ignore the discussion on this bill for a week and then you object for no discernible reason.  Is it just that you want to slow this bill down?  Have you realized that your own bills are so awful you want to keep this on the floor for as long as possible so we don't get to any more of them?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[/quote]

Sponsor Feedback: Origination
STatus: Objection filed by TNF, a vote to come soon.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Just to be clear, that amendment is to replace this, which is the language in the bill currently.

[TNF]

I object.

You completely ignore the discussion on this bill for a week and then you object for no discernible reason.  Is it just that you want to slow this bill down?  Have you realized that your own bills are so awful you want to keep this on the floor for as long as possible so we don't get to any more of them?

I've kept up with the discussion, I just haven't posted in this thread because I have little to add to it. There's literally no need for this legislation, as the previous bill is just fine. When you figure that out and stop shilling for for-profit colleges, then maybe you can advise me on how "awful" my legislation (which passes more often than not, I should add) is.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

I am okay with the student loan forgiveness bit, but the rest just seems like we are trying too hard. The whole purpose of the tax is to discourage for-profit education. Giving these companies tax breaks for "investing in their institution" is an easy way out for them to avoid the tax because, like I said, these for-profits typically have wonderful facilities to distract people from their poor educational track records.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

I am okay with the student loan forgiveness bit, but the rest just seems like we are trying too hard. The whole purpose of the tax is to discourage for-profit education. Giving these companies tax breaks for "investing in their institution" is an easy way out for them to avoid the tax because, like I said, these for-profits typically have wonderful facilities to distract people from their poor educational track records.

These for-profits are typically either mostly on-line or in shopping centers.  Where I live community colleges have more impressive facilities. 

How is the tax supposed to discourage for-profit education?  I thought you said it doesn't increase the cost of tuition?   

I would hope that our purpose is to do something to try to keep students from being ruined by debt from for-profit schools, not just to limit their options as much as possible. Can you honestly tell me students will be worse off from this bill?  It seems like we are losing sight of the point.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

I object.

You completely ignore the discussion on this bill for a week and then you object for no discernible reason.  Is it just that you want to slow this bill down?  Have you realized that your own bills are so awful you want to keep this on the floor for as long as possible so we don't get to any more of them?

I've kept up with the discussion, I just haven't posted in this thread because I have little to add to it. There's literally no need for this legislation, as the previous bill is just fine. When you figure that out and stop shilling for for-profit colleges, then maybe you can advise me on how "awful" my legislation (which passes more often than not, I should add) is.

TNF, that doesn't answer my question.  Why are you objecting to the current amendment?  Do you prefer my bill as it is and don't want to change it?

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

I am okay with the student loan forgiveness bit, but the rest just seems like we are trying too hard. The whole purpose of the tax is to discourage for-profit education. Giving these companies tax breaks for "investing in their institution" is an easy way out for them to avoid the tax because, like I said, these for-profits typically have wonderful facilities to distract people from their poor educational track records.

These for-profits are typically either mostly on-line or in shopping centers.  Where I live community colleges have more impressive facilities. 

How is the tax supposed to discourage for-profit education?  I thought you said it doesn't increase the cost of tuition?   

I would hope that our purpose is to do something to try to keep students from being ruined by debt from for-profit schools, not just to limit their options as much as possible. Can you honestly tell me students will be worse off from this bill?  It seems like we are losing sight of the point.

The tax, from my understanding, was put in place to lessen the net income or potential profits from these for-profit schools, hence making the market less glamorous to enter. That is my understanding at least, I had no part of the bill we are trying to amend.

We could tax the profits of these institutions at a 50% clip rather than revenue. I am okay with that. I am simply worried that allowing them to invest in their facilities will be used as an easy way to shift profits elsewhere to avoid paying taxes. They can do things like upgrade faculty facilities but still offer a crap product. The for-profit legal education market works that way. Nice campuses, nice facilities, but their students are hopeless when they graduate. 

My biggest qualm is, I simply don't like for-profit schools and I don't know of any that are actually worth the money. I would be okay if they disappeared entirely, but I am not going to advocate or force that. People are free to do as they wish.

If you want to tax the profits at a 50% clip and keep the student loan forgiveness, I am okay with something like that. I need to think about the upgrades to the facility clause because I think that could easily be taken advantage of by these companies.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Thank you.  I would consider accepting an amendment to address the facilities issue.  I just think in general we should treat revenue used to build up the academics and programs for students differently than shareholder profits or the like, and I want the language to be clear and comprehensive on that point. 

To demonstrate the problem we have right now, consider two for-profit colleges.  One is a complete diploma mill without any real classes and makes a 75% corporate profit on tuition, the other invests more in its students and makes 15%, and some of that is reinvested in succeeding years.  With an across the board 50% tax on revenue, the former will be the one that can still operate as it is because it is still making a profit .

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

Thank you.  I would consider accepting an amendment to address the facilities issue.  I just think in general we should treat revenue used to build up the academics and programs for students differently than shareholder profits or the like, and I want the language to be clear and comprehensive on that point. 

To demonstrate the problem we have right now, consider two for-profit colleges.  One is a complete diploma mill without any real classes and makes a 75% corporate profit on tuition, the other invests more in its students and makes 15%, and some of that is reinvested in succeeding years.  With an across the board 50% tax on revenue, the former will be the one that can still operate as it is because it is still making a profit .

I get what you're saying, but does a for-profit college exist that is not a complete diploma mill?

That is a half-serious question. I still want this bill to make it so that a for-profit educational venture is still not attractive to most companies. I may be biased (I am most certainly), but I just don't like anything that tries to profit off education.

But as I said, I will be flexible on the student loan forgiveness, because I want to help the students, and shifting the tax from the revenue to the profit.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[/quote]

Sponsor Feedback: Origination
STatus: Objection filed by TNF, a vote is now open on the above amendment. Senators please vote Aye, Nay or Abstain.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Nay

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Aye

[Goldwater]

AYE

[tmthforu94]

Aye

[Talleyrand]

NAY

[TNF]

Nay

[bore]

Nay

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

AYE

[President Tyrion]

Aye

But considering the voting pattern, I'm worried I might be missing something

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Aye

But considering the voting pattern, I'm worried I might be missing something

As far as I can tell, the other leftists are just trying to scuttle this compromise amendment because they don't want any bill to pass. It has nothing to do with the particulars of the amendment, which compared to the previous versions of this bill increases the taxes and accountability of for-profits, as well as invests more in vocational education.

[DC Al Fine]

Aye

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Vote on Amendment 59:68 by shua:

Aye (6): DC al Fine, Goldwater, NC Yankee, shua, Tmthforu94 and TyriontheImperialist
Nay (4): bore, Mr. X, Talleyrand and TNF
Abstain (0):

Didn't Vote (0):

With six votes in the affirmative and four in then egative, the amendment has been adopted.

[President Tyrion]

I seem to get on both sides of the vote rather often

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Moving to the center to run for President?