Just a few weeks ago, an online war of sorts was waged on Twitter. Being the socially aware member of society that I am, I got engaged. Like the now infamous Kony 2012 before it, I let my voice be heard (or read) one tweet at a time.
The subject, or at least “target,” of such Twitter attention? The President’s own initiative to raise awareness about the impending (possibly) rise in student loan interest rates. In Washington jargon, I would later learn, this is known simply as H.R. 4628.
Taking to socially networked waves, I tweeted Senators John McCain, Jon Kyl and Representative David Schweikert, asking them to not double the rate or, in short Twitter vernacular, “#DontDoubleMyRate.”
I even went as far as to actually call Schweikert’s office, and though I never spoke with him directly, both times my call was taken (by two different people). The utmost respect was given by me regarding their position and, as a concerned and active registered voter in my community, they reciprocated.
My name and contact information was taken, and a few days later I received a letter from Representative David Schweikert from Arizona’s 5th congressional district.
In it, Rep. Schweikert laid out exactly why he would not be ensuring a lowered interest rate on student loans, writing in part, “…the law included a sunset provision that returned the reduced rate … a one year extension of the 3.4 percent interest rate. I could not in good conscience support this measure.”
He even provided evidence to his cause. Accompanying Rep. Schweikert’s (barely) one-page letter was a print-out of an article written by Douglas Holtz-Eakin for National Review Online.
Holtz-Eakin points out in the article (as squarely-embittered as one can) that there are a variety of other issues facing this broader situation than the low yielding H.R. 4628 sunset provision. This move by the President was more for political purposes than for actual care or concern about the middle-class and the rising cost of higher education.
After reading Rep. Schweikert’s letter and accompanying propaganda, obviously my point wasn’t made clear enough, or perhaps wasn’t conveyed with quite as much adequate conviction as I would have liked.
Allow me to clarify for you now, Representative David Schweikert.
My want, in not having student loans interest rates double, isn’t based solely on how, or if, it even pertains to me now (or in the future). My want, to keep student loan interest rates down, is strictly for surface appearances.
Extending for one additional year lowered student loan interest rates on the very people who (possibly) voted you into office would be the least you could do in these trying times. Particularly when one considers how many raises you and your fellow distinguished members of Congress have given yourselves over the years.
This return, regardless of the perceived meagerness by Holtz-Eakin and those who subscribe to him, is one that shows a bipartisan effort to protect a group (much like the various banks and corporations you’ve bailed out) from falling to avoidable hurdles.
If the provision affords students with an additional $5 to $7 a month, imagine all the free-market stimulation possibilities in areas of need.
No one’s asking for taxes, loans or interest rates to be erased (unlike some of the banks and corporations you’d rather represent). Instead, one more year for lower rates (for those that it would pertain to) is all that is being asked. Every little bit helps.
Reach the reporter at jbfortne@asu.edu
Follow us on Twitter or like us on Facebook. Click here to subscribe to the daily State Press email newsletter.
