ben nelson

Update: Quick update. I just got off the phone with an activist in Nebraska who provided some clarity on Nelson's statements. It's not just Pell Grants that Nelson is opposed to, nor are they going to make or break his decision on supporting the stimulus. Rather, as a more conservative Democrat from a Red State, he has a more narrow definition than other Democrats as to what constitutes stimulus. Accordingly, he'd rather that items like the Pell Grants be taken out and put into a different piece of legislation.

That's fair enough. I can respect that fact that Nelson may need to take more conservative positions due to the ideological make-up of the Nebraska electorate. And maybe we should cut him some slack for that. The flipside to this, though, is that Nelson has a history of fighting with the youth community on this issue and he shouldn't be slamming Pell Grants in the media. That's not going to build up youth support for Democratic candidates in Nebraska.

FYI, I altered the original title of this post to reflect these updates.
------------------------------------

Think Progress is reporting that Senator Ben Nelson, (D - Neb) may vote against the stimulus if it contains provisions for increasing Pell Grants:

College students sought financial aid in record numbers last year, leading even Bush administration officials to call for an increase in Pell Grant funding — “the most important form of aid to needy students.”

Yet Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NE) is arguing against the House version of the economic recovery package because of its funding for Pell Grants. Nelson says he wants to eliminate “non-stimulative” and non-“job creation” items in the bill:

Even some Democrats are speaking out against including popular programs — such as an almost $15 billion increase in funding for Pell grants for higher education — in legislation that is supposed to spark an economic recovery. “You don’t want to be against Pell grants,” said Sen. Ben. Nelson (D-Neb.). “But the question is: How many people go to work on Pell grants?”

This is not the first time Nelson has been on the wrong side of education policy. In 2007, during the passage of the Higher Education Access Act, Nelson tried to weaken the bill and provide billions in subsidies to corporate lenders like Nelnet. At the time, US PIRG released this statement on an amendment proposed by Nelson to the Higher Education Access Act (link to US PIRG site no longer functions):

The Nelson-Burr Amendment cuts $4.2 billion from need-based aid to low-income students over the next five years and gives the bulk of it to for-profit student lenders.

The Nelson-Burr amendment reduces aid for the neediest students by $290 per year, or nearly $1200 over their 4-year college career.

The amendment lowers the subsidy reduction for-profit lenders from .5 percent to .35 percent and pays for it by cutting $4.2 billion from the Promise Grant program.

The Nelson-Burr amendment takes grants away from low-income students and gives it back to banks including:

• $800 million to Sallie Mae over the next 5 years.
• $160 million to Nelnet over the next 5 years.

The Senate bill reduces less from private student lenders than both the President’s Fiscal Year 2008 budget and the House reconciliation bill. The Nelson-Burr amendment would cut back on subsidies even further, at the expense of the more than five million students who receive Pell Grants every year.

U.S. PIRG urges Senators to vote against the Nelson-Burr Amendment to S. 1762

Today, Nelson is just as wrong in his statements on Pell Grants in the stimulus. Worse, he's parroting Republican talking points on the issue. Just last week, the Chronicle of Higher Education reported that the GOP had fixated on Pell Grants as a key whipping boy in their offensive against the stimulus package:

The entire stimulus package will have much less to offer colleges and students (and beneficiaries of many other social programs) if Congressional Republicans have their way. In speeches and television appearances over the weekend, Sen. John McCain of Arizona and Rep. John Boehner of Ohio, both of whom are prominent members of the minority in their respective chambers, criticized the Democrats’ stimulus packages for greatly emphasizing spending that may or may not spark the economy rather than tax breaks that would put money directly into consumers’ and businesses’ pockets.

Boehner specifically singled out aid for education in his criticism. “[P]roviding $300 billion of this package to states — $166 billion in direct aid to the states, another $140 billion in education funding — this is not going to do anything, anything to stimulate our economy, to help the — our ailing economy,” the Ohio Republican said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

As Think Progress accurately points out, and as we reported here on Future Majority last week, these arguments are bunk. Increases to Pell Grants are absolutely a form of stimulus in both the long- and short-term. They will be spent immediately on tuition, books, and in local economies where students live. They will allow young Americans and older ones looking for a leg-up the opportunity to get a better education and increase their employment prospects.

Once again Sen. Nelson is on the wrong side of this issue. I think it's time he hears from some of his younger constituents struggling to attend school and make ends meet in this economy.

So the vote on Ben Nelson's amendment to the Higher Education Access Act didn't happen today, but will likely go down tomorrow. If any of the senators listed below are from your state, you've still got time to give them a call and ask them to vote Yes on the bill, and NO on the Nelson-Burr Amendment.

US PIRG has a new analysis of the amendment and why this is important:

The Nelson-Burr Amendment cuts $4.2 billion from need-based aid to low-income students over the next five years and gives the bulk of it to for-profit student lenders.

The Nelson-Burr amendment reduces aid for the neediest students by $290 per year, or nearly $1200 over their 4-year college career.

The amendment lowers the subsidy reduction for-profit lenders from .5 percent to .35 percent and pays for it by cutting $4.2 billion from the Promise Grant program.

The Nelson-Burr amendment takes grants away from low-income students and gives it back to banks including:

• $800 million to Sallie Mae over the next 5 years.
• $160 million to Nelnet over the next 5 years.

The Senate bill reduces less from private student lenders than both the President’s Fiscal Year 2008 budget and the House reconciliation bill. The Nelson-Burr amendment would cut back on subsidies even further, at the expense of the more than five million students who receive Pell Grants every year.

U.S. PIRG urges Senators to vote against the Nelson-Burr Amendment to S. 1762

$800 million to Sallie Mae, $160 million to NelNet. Meanwhile we're getting saddled with even more debt. This aggression will not stand. Call your Senator.