Submitted by Christina Nash (not verified) on January 21, 2009 - 10:18am.
Jason: As a former congressional staffer, I’m sure you’ve drafted a number of letters to various administration officials and committee chairmen. Are you suggesting that any letter sent but not posted to a Web site should be considered “back-room maneuvering”?
To be clear, for a back-room deal to take place, at least two parties must be involved. Based on your latest conspiracy theory, I guess we I have to assume that Chairmen Miller and Kennedy were either hoodwinked or paid off regarding this proposal, which you claim was “hidden” in the stimulus bill. That seems like a pretty remarkable assertion. It’s also remarkable that you fail to mention that this so called “hidden” fix is temporary.
P.S. The stimulus bill also includes $50 million for student aid administration to help with the FFELP liquidity programs and to service the surge in the direct loan program. Was this publicly debated? Who came up with the $50 million figure? Should it be more, or less? Is New America concerned there weren’t any letters posted to Web sites on this issue?
"Back-Room Maneuvering" or More Spin from New America?
Jason: As a former congressional staffer, I’m sure you’ve drafted a number of letters to various administration officials and committee chairmen. Are you suggesting that any letter sent but not posted to a Web site should be considered “back-room maneuvering”?
To be clear, for a back-room deal to take place, at least two parties must be involved. Based on your latest conspiracy theory, I guess we I have to assume that Chairmen Miller and Kennedy were either hoodwinked or paid off regarding this proposal, which you claim was “hidden” in the stimulus bill. That seems like a pretty remarkable assertion. It’s also remarkable that you fail to mention that this so called “hidden” fix is temporary.
P.S. The stimulus bill also includes $50 million for student aid administration to help with the FFELP liquidity programs and to service the surge in the direct loan program. Was this publicly debated? Who came up with the $50 million figure? Should it be more, or less? Is New America concerned there weren’t any letters posted to Web sites on this issue?