Is Hillary's Personal Story About Student Loans a Fabrication?

[Baobab]

This is a theory!
http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/hillarys-personal-story-about-student-loans-fabrication


Is Hillary's Personal Story About Student Loans a Fabrication? There's a slippery slope from pragmatism to pure self interest.

By Les Leopold

"I know [student loan forgiveness] works because Bill and I did that. We both borrowed money when we went to law school and we paid it back as a percentage of our income, so I could go to work at the Children's Defense Fund, not some big law firm that would pay me more. I wanted to do the work I loved...I want everyone to have that chance."

Hillary Clinton tells this story to struggling students. She told it to minority students in Mississippi in November 2015, and she recently told it again to minority students in Brooklyn.

Her story makes several important points to attract young people who are flocking to Sanders.

First it offers hope that something practical can be done about crushing student loans. Wouldn't it be great if all student debt payments could be reduced to a percentage of income? She argues that is much more realistic than the Sanders free tuition plan.

Second, it suggests humble origins, and therefore combats the troublesome fact that she recently earned as much from one Wall Street speech as the average worker earns in five years. In this story, Hillary, too, had to amass debt just like other financially struggling students. And only by the good fortune of the Yale Law School debt forgiveness program was she able to work her way out of debt with little difficulty. "Everyone should have that chance."

[Igel]

4. The writer has an axe to grind.

And unexplained problems with the story.

The [ ] shows that HRC didn't say "forgiveness." Red flag #1.

She said,

“And then we’re going to save you thousands of dollars by making it possible for you to repay it as a percentage of the income you make when you get out of school. And I know that works because Bill and I did that. We both borrowed money when we went to law school and then we paid it back as a percentage, so that I could go work for the Children’s Defense Fund not for some big law firm that would pay me more. I wanted to do the work I loved, but I had to pay it back. I want everybody to have that chance.” (Hillary Clinton, Remarks At A Campaign Event, Memphis, TN, 11/20/15)

The author lied to you. Bait-and-switch. She said one thing, the author claims she said another. Was he stupid, manipulative, or just plain ignorant? Hard to tell.

The program the author then refers to at Yale is precisely a kind of loan forgiveness plan, however. It's a weird one, though, and a rare one. You apply, you get some percentage of your loans paid for. Yale doesn't hold your debt, it cuts a check to pay off all or part of it. It's not a traditional loan forgiveness program, in which the loan holder or guarantor picks up the tab and writes off the debt. That is almost always some branch of government, because few private lenders are willing to write off debt out of the goodness of their hearts.

It's also not a restructured or graduated payment plan, which is what HRC referred to. Some private lenders might do that, but the interest rate doesn't change and the debt repayment takes longer. It's the government restructured loans that tend to put the kibosh on increased interest payments under restructuring.

I can only assume the writer was unaware of the difference between the two completely different kinds of plans. Maybe he's unable to understand the difference, maybe he's indifferent to the difference because ignorance helps him uncritically think about it and make his point to those similarly inclined.


By the way, Yale had precisely the kind of repayment program in which you repay a percentage of your loan. It was established in 1971, and if you signed up (and were accepted) then you'd repay 4% of your annual income for every $1000 borrowed. http://yaledailynews.com/blog/2001/03/27/70s-debt-program-finally-ending/

Now, did HRC apply for program? Did she receive admission to the program? Are the GOPers right in saying she only stayed at the CDF for less than a year?

I simply don't know. However, a lot of people have bought into the misinformation buried in the uncritical acceptance of the replacement of HRC's words by the writer's, the bait-and-switch of one program by another (later) program. They rather like being manipulated in the furtherance of what they always knew was true because, well, it's flattering and politically expedient.

RIP critical thinking. Alas, we hardly knew you.

[Baobab]

5. Critical thinking as a casualty of this election.

Look at her story about her healthcare plan critically in the context of US trade policy in 1994-1995

Consider that in 1994 we joined the WTO with its General Agreement on Trade in Services.

What was its effect on the policy space for health care? What alternatives did it eliminate? What did it replace those with?

Critical thinking indeed. Everything is backwards with the Clintons.

Since we are talking about education, a similar situation exists with education. So her main premise isn't just wrong and a lie, regardless of whether she got a loan or not, a much larger issue exists which is that she's been pushing and agenda, and can be expected to continue to push said agenda that attempts to make public education - which was in the past potentially delivered in a non-profit, non-monetized manner, FTA-illegal.

The 850 member European University Association stated this in a statement last February 5 (2015)

Nobody has called her out on this to date.

[Feeling the Bern]

2. Wouldn't doubt it. Camp Weathervane will say anything to get elected.

[Scuba]

3. Based on her track record, everything she says should be taken with a few shakers of salt.