When listening to any politician on where he wants to take the country, we must examine the facts and ensure it is not filtered through an ideology as opposed to reality. Mitt Romney’s last statements in the education realm are very worrisome and indicate he is in fact more concerned about an ideological stance on education as opposed to what is best for most Americans.
This week has been full of information from both candidates for president. They both want to take the country in different directions. That is what elections are about. Each candidate lay out their vision for the country and we elect the one that we believe can fulfill that vision that we believe will be best four ourselves, our families, and for the country as a whole.
In order for us to make an intelligent decision, we require that our candidates are honest with their vision. In other words they must tell us why their particular vision is best for us. The two visions can both be good for us, both be bad for us, one bad and one good.
When the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) was passed, a very important piece of legislation was included as part of it. The legislation removed banks as middle men from granting student loans. This would seem to be a no brainer for those of all political stripes.
Previous to the above change, banks would service the loans to students charging interest in the process. However, if any student defaulted on the loan, the government made the bank whole. The government paid the bank for the bad loan. On any normal loan banks make their profits from charging interests and that interest also covers the cost of doing business which includes some borrowers defaulting.
In the special case of student loans, banks made the profit from interest without ever having to worry about losses from defaults. This is classic corporate socialism. The society transfers their wealth/income to banks in the form of profits and any loans defaulted. Since the society, “we the people” , the government was taking all the risk, the Obama administration simply decided to bring the student loan program completely in house. Profits from the loans handled defaults but most importantly were used to enable even more loans and grants, a win for society.
Mitt Romney has pivoted his campaign to education. In his stump speech he states that he wants to bring the banks back to provide student loans. He cloaks it in the veil of free market and capitalism. The fact is that the change the president made was in the best interest of society while Romney is asking for our vote to reduce available loans and grants to our students.
In his continued pivot to education Mitt Romney went to a charter school in Philadelphia and had a little round table with teachers. In the round table he told the teachers that several studies have been done that showed that class sizes had nothing to do with how well students are educated. A teacher with an incredulous tone asked him for the study stating that he does not think any practicing teacher would agree. Another teacher asked Mr. Romney why instead of making local public schools better many seem to simply want to move students.
Mitt Romney knows exactly what he is doing. States like Texas are making draconian cuts to education budgets that are increasing class sizes and hurting education. Passage of Paul Ryan’s middle class austerity budget would put these cuts and others on steroids. Romney is trying to create a narrative that would have us accept an alternate state of reality. Only accepting this alternate state of reality can we believe that his policies would be better for the middle class and America.