Total party line vote on reducing student loan interest rates

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

H.R. 5, College Student Relief Act,  passed 223-190.

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2007/roll030.xml

[Conan]

Scott Garrett is such a bad person.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

I wonder what Republicans in college on this board think about this total party line vote, or is daddy rich enough that they don't need any loans?

BTW, for the poor, grants and subsidized loans don't come close to covering the cost of college. It's gotten to the point where public universities are unaffordable.

[Gabu]

I'm curious why so many people were absent for that vote.

[MasterJedi]

Unfortunate that Republicans didn't vote for it.

[J.G.H.]

Actually, this vote was only for the rules resolution, which is always party line. I don't think the actual bill has been voted on yet.

[Gabu]

Actually, this vote was only for the rules resolution, which is always party line. I don't think the actual bill has been voted on yet.

Ah, that would explain the number of people who didn't show up for it.

[RBH]

yeah, a majority of Republicans voted for that bill.

124 Republicans and all the Dems voting Aye

71 Republicans voting Nay

[True Democrat]

yeah, a majority of Republicans voted for that bill.

124 Republicans and all the Dems voting Aye

71 Republicans voting Nay

Link?

[RBH]

http://clerk.house.gov/cgi-bin/vote.asp?year=2007&rollnumber=32

[Deano963]

yeah, a majority of Republicans voted for that bill.

124 Republicans and all the Dems voting Aye

71 Republicans voting Nay

Wow, 356-71. That is one beautiful, veto-proof majority. Too bad the Senate Republicans will either water it down/gut it or give it too few votes as is to override a veto from Bush.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

My bad, on the actual vote, the Republicans tend to vote differently than on the procedural votes. The final vote was 356-71. The bill lowers interest rates from 6.8% to 3.4% over a period of 5 years. That 3.4% is still higher than the 2.8% it was when Bush was running for re-selection.

yeah, a majority of Republicans voted for that bill.

124 Republicans and all the Dems voting Aye

71 Republicans voting Nay

Wow, 356-71. That is one beautiful, veto-proof majority. Too bad the Senate Republicans will either water it down/gut it or give it too few votes as is to override a veto from Bush.

That is a possibility, that House Republicans felt free to vote for it, hoping to kill it in the Senate.

[Beet]

yeah, a majority of Republicans voted for that bill.

124 Republicans and all the Dems voting Aye

71 Republicans voting Nay

Wow, so a bill that was supported by 64 percent of Republicans (probably higher in the 109th) didn't become law. That's some major effectiveness by Tom Delay there.

[Padfoot]

Actually, this vote was only for the rules resolution, which is always party line. I don't think the actual bill has been voted on yet.

Ah, that would explain the number of people who didn't show up for it.

I'm not an expert on parlimentary procedure and rules so I'm a little baffled as to why my congresswoman voted No on the Resolution but Yes on the actual bill.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Horrible People:

Bachmann
Baker
Barrett (SC)
Barton (TX)
Bilbray
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blunt
Boehner
Bonner
Brady (TX)
Brown (SC)
Burgess
Campbell (CA)
Cannon
Cantor
Carter
Coble
Conaway
Culberson
Deal (GA)
Doolittle
Dreier
Feeney
   Flake
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Garrett (NJ)
Gingrey
Granger
Hastert
Hensarling
Herger
Hoekstra
Issa
Jordan
King (IA)
Kingston
Kline (MN)
Lamborn
Lewis (CA)
Linder
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Marchant
McCrery
McHenry
   McKeon
Mica
Musgrave
Myrick
Neugebauer
Nunes
Pence
Price (GA)
Putnam
Radanovich
Ryan (WI)
Sali
Schmidt
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shadegg
Smith (NE)
Souder
Tancredo
Thornberry
Westmoreland
Wicker
Wilson (SC)

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

I see the House Democrats have learned well from the Republicans how to craft bills for maximum political advantage and juggling of the budget numbers.  Those lower rates in H.R. 5 get phased in slowly and then expire in 2012.  The Senate version, S. 282 is a much more honest bill.  It has the same slow phase in but the lower rates don't expire so that the Democrats can get political mileage for voting for lower student loan rates a second time.

[MODU]

I see the House Democrats have learned well from the Republicans how to craft bills for maximum political advantage and juggling of the budget numbers.  Those lower rates in H.R. 5 get phased in slowly and then expire in 2012.  The Senate version, S. 282 is a much more honest bill.  It has the same slow phase in but the lower rates don't expire so that the Democrats can get political mileage for voting for lower student loan rates a second time.

Yeah.  If you are going to lower the rates, lower the rates for good rather than have the rates pop back up again in a few years.  "Solve" the problem.  Of course, if they did make the rate cuts permanent, then they wouldn't have anything in the future to campaign about.  This is one of the things I really hate about politics.  They believe they are not there to solve anything.

[Padfoot]

Actually, this vote was only for the rules resolution, which is always party line. I don't think the actual bill has been voted on yet.

Ah, that would explain the number of people who didn't show up for it.

I'm not an expert on parlimentary procedure and rules so I'm a little baffled as to why my congresswoman voted No on the Resolution but Yes on the actual bill.

Could someone please answer my question.  I'm very confused.

[True Democrat]

Actually, this vote was only for the rules resolution, which is always party line. I don't think the actual bill has been voted on yet.

Ah, that would explain the number of people who didn't show up for it.

I'm not an expert on parlimentary procedure and rules so I'm a little baffled as to why my congresswoman voted No on the Resolution but Yes on the actual bill.

All the Republicans who voted No on the resolution but yes on the actual bill didn't actually want to vote for the bill.  They didn't want to be put in the position to vote on the bill at all, so they voted against the resolution, hoping it wouldn't come to the floor.  However, when the bill did get to the floor, they didn't want to look like they hate college students, so they voted Yes on the bill.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Actually, this vote was only for the rules resolution, which is always party line. I don't think the actual bill has been voted on yet.

Ah, that would explain the number of people who didn't show up for it.

I'm not an expert on parlimentary procedure and rules so I'm a little baffled as to why my congresswoman voted No on the Resolution but Yes on the actual bill.

All the Republicans who voted No on the resolution but yes on the actual bill didn't actually want to vote for the bill.  They didn't want to be put in the position to vote on the bill at all, so they voted against the resolution, hoping it wouldn't come to the floor.  However, when the bill did get to the floor, they didn't want to look like they hate college students, so they voted Yes on the bill.

These Republicans are whacko.  bi-partisanship, we need to destroy them.

[Democratic Hawk]

Actually, this vote was only for the rules resolution, which is always party line. I don't think the actual bill has been voted on yet.

Ah, that would explain the number of people who didn't show up for it.

I'm not an expert on parlimentary procedure and rules so I'm a little baffled as to why my congresswoman voted No on the Resolution but Yes on the actual bill.

All the Republicans who voted No on the resolution but yes on the actual bill didn't actually want to vote for the bill.  They didn't want to be put in the position to vote on the bill at all, so they voted against the resolution, hoping it wouldn't come to the floor.  However, when the bill did get to the floor, they didn't want to look like they hate college students, so they voted Yes on the bill.

9 Republicans [Ginny Brown-Waite, Tim Johnson, Frank LoBiondo, John McHugh, Jon Porter, Jim Ramstad, David Reichert, Christopher Smith, Jerry Weller] voted against the GOP Motion to Recommit With Instructions so perhaps they among the 124 GOP Ayes in the final vote are, at least, be that the case, half genuine in their support for this Bill

Still, it's a defeat for the House GOP leadership when all said and done

Dave

[Democratic Hawk]

Actually, this vote was only for the rules resolution, which is always party line. I don't think the actual bill has been voted on yet.

Ah, that would explain the number of people who didn't show up for it.

I'm not an expert on parlimentary procedure and rules so I'm a little baffled as to why my congresswoman voted No on the Resolution but Yes on the actual bill.

All the Republicans who voted No on the resolution but yes on the actual bill didn't actually want to vote for the bill.  They didn't want to be put in the position to vote on the bill at all, so they voted against the resolution, hoping it wouldn't come to the floor.  However, when the bill did get to the floor, they didn't want to look like they hate college students, so they voted Yes on the bill.

These Republicans are whacko.  bi-partisanship, we need to destroy them.

You ought to thankful of bi-partisanship. It could be impossible to pass much of the Democrats' agenda without it given the power of the President's veto. Not to mention, wherever appropriate, such a narrow majority in the Senate

Dave

[Storebought]

I can't believe that Ron Paul voted for this bill. What a sellout

[Democratic Hawk]

I can't believe that Ron Paul voted for this bill. What a sellout

Perhaps, even such minimal goverment iconoclasts as Ron Paul are capable of being pragmatic from time to time

Dave