WASHINGTON, D.C. — Alabama Congressman Bradley Byrne (R-AL1) came out swinging Monday against Hillary Clinton’s new proposal to eliminate student debt in an attempt to gain favor with young voters.
The program, announced Monday in New Hampshire, would push the federal government to pay an estimated $350 billion over 10 years and include refinancing options for around 25 million people with outstanding student debt, according to multiple reports.
It would also give $175 billion in grants to states guaranteeing that students would not be forced to take out loans for tuition at four-year public colleges and universities, according to The New York Times. In return, states would be forced to spend more on higher education and slow the rise of tuition costs.
Clinton’s plan adopts President Obama’s proposal for two years of free community college as well as allowing students with loans to refinance at lower rates, according to The Wall Street Journal.
Byrne, who came out against the president’s two-year college plan earlier in the year, said “Instead of this kind of ‘pie in the sky’ proposal, we should be talking about targeted programs that could actually reduce the cost of college while also closing the skills gap. Let’s move past political rhetoric and actually focus on realistic solutions.”
In an op-ed in January, Byrne discussed what he believes should be the solution to the problem of college affordability.
“During my time as chancellor of Alabama’s two year college system, I was proud to make major advancements in jobs training. In fact, we funded a program that provided scholarships for high school students to get training in high demand skill areas based on regional needs. Programs like this offer a much more legitimate and focused approach in an effort to connect Americans with high-paying jobs.”
“Both Republicans and Democrats agree that we need to make college more affordable, but Hillary Clinton’s plan is just another example of an unserious proposal that is nothing more than a campaign publicity stunt,” Byrne said. “Instead of laying out a realistic proposal, Hillary Clinton’s plan would place heavy burdens on state governments and drive up the national debt without addressing workforce demands.”
