Pearce wasn't truthful about student loan position

Editor,

Politicians like Steve Pearce have learned they can feed students empty promises and lies and get away with it. Why? Because while young people may work to get their voices heard, they don't back up their activism with votes.

We will inherit a mismanaged economy, a shrinking job market, a polluted planet and mountains of debt, both for ourselves and for the country. We have a greater stake in this election than arguably any group in America, and yet we fail to show up on voting day to make our opinions felt. So when someone like Pearce essentially lies to us about his record on student loans - as he did in an Aug. 29 story in the Daily Lobo - he does it so he doesn't have to fear recrimination at the ballot box. Pearce told the Lobo he "tried to pass a bill that would allow students to get more money from loans." This couldn't be farther from the truth.

Last year, Pearce voted against the College Cost Reduction Act of 2007, the largest increase in college aid since the GI Bill. The law cut subsidies to loan companies and transferred the money to direct financial aid for students. It increased the maximum Pell Grant to $5,200 and cut in half interest rates on federally subsidized loans. Pearce was the only member of the New Mexico congressional delegation, including two other Republicans, to vote against the bill. His reasoning was stated in a press release on his Web site. The release claimed the bill "irresponsibly worsens our long-term financial stability by creating several new entitlement programs that, as history has shown, we'll be stuck with forever."

First, the bill did not increase spending. It paid for the benefits to students by cutting the benefits to loan companies. Second, if Pearce considers the ability to get an education an "entitlement," then I don't want him anywhere near the U.S. Senate. I will not be voting for someone in November who thinks so low of the importance of education. Pearce argued against the College Cost Reduction Act on the grounds that it would worsen our long-term financial stability - this all coming from a guy whose party has spent the U.S. toward its largest deficit in history.

If the Bush presidency has taught us anything about financial stability, it's that tax breaks for the rich are not the way to go. Pearce has supported Bush administration policies every step of the way, and there's no reason to think he'll do anything different as a senator than he's done as a congressman. Now, however, he's trying to appease UNM students with a phony story about supporting a bill that would help students get more money from student loans. The truth is that Pearce's record is abysmal on the issue. In 2006, Pearce cast a decisive vote for a Republican budget that included massive student loan cuts. The Washington Post said it was "the single largest cutback in the history of the student loan program." One estimate projected the cutback would increase student loan costs for the average New Mexico student by $1,630. Is that what Pearce calls a commitment to student issues? In 2005, Pearce voted against a bill to extend an expiring tuition tax credit. In 2004, Pearce opposed $2 billion in funding to increase Pell Grants. In 2003, Pearce voted to cut student loan funding - also by $2 billion. It seems not a year goes by that Pearce doesn't find a way to oppose funding for student loans. Given his record on the issue, I'm personally offended that Pearce would paint himself as concerned about student issues in the Daily Lobo when he's anything but. What would be worse, though, is if we as a student body let him get away with it by not voting this election.

Diego Urbina

UNM student