Subject: While Cortez Masto Focuses on College Affordability, Sharron Angle and Congressman Heck Follow the Lead of Their Party’s Bosses in Washington
From: Sarah Zukowski <[email-masked]>
To: Sarah Zukowski <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2016 08:04:26 -0700

For Immediate Release

April 29, 2016

Contact: Sarah Zukowski, [email-masked]

While Cortez Masto Focuses on College Affordability, Sharron Angle and
Congressman Heck Follow the Lead of Their Party’s Bosses in Washington

Las Vegas, NV - This week, former Nevada Attorney General and U.S. Senate
candidate Catherine Cortez Masto hosted southern Nevada college students at
a college affordability roundtable. One of the roundtable participants,
Idania Ramirez, a UNLV student, spoke with
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mi1cVYfqhuE&feature=youtu.be> Telemundo
Las Vegas about the financial and economic challenges she faces to attend
UNLV and the need to increase assistance for students planning to attend
college.

Sadly, Congressman Heck is actively working against students, supporting
efforts by Washington Republicans to make college more expensive for Nevada
students. Not only has Congressman Heck repeatedly voted to cut funding for
Pell Grants, he has also supported Washington Republican efforts to repeal
DACA and deny tens of thousands of immigrant children the opportunity to
achieve a college education.

“While Catherine Cortez Masto is meeting with students to talk about how to
make college more affordable, Congressman Heck is voting with his Party’s
bosses in Washington to make college more expensive and defund the
immigration executive actions to keep families together,” said Sarah
Zukowski, spokesperson for the Nevada State Democratic Party. “The choice
in this election is clear: Catherine Cortez Masto will focus on solving
problems like making college more affordable and keeping families together,
Republicans like Sharron Angle and Congressman Heck will side with their
Party bosses in Washington to make college more expensive and deport Nevada
DREAMers.”

Background:

Heck Voted For House Republican Budget That Would Cut Spending By $5.5
Trillion Over 10 Years. In March 2015, Heck voted for: “Adoption of the
concurrent resolution that would provide for $2.937 trillion in new budget
authority in fiscal 2016, not including off-budget accounts. It would
assume $5.5 trillion in spending reductions over the next 10 years,
including by assuming repeal of the 2010 healthcare law. It also would
propose reducing spending on Medicare and Medicaid and changing programs
such as food stamps. It would call for restructuring Medicare into a
‘premium support’ system beginning in 2024, call for a deficit-neutral
overhaul of the tax code that lowers rates and assume $147 billion in
additional savings through ‘dynamic scoring,’ and would include
instructions to committees to trigger the budget reconciliation process to
cut mandatory spending. The resolution would call for fiscal 2016 base
discretionary spending that adheres to the sequester-reduced defense and
non-defense caps set by the Budget Control Act, and for future years it
would assume a 10-year increase in defense caps of $387 billion while
calling for cutting non-defense caps by $759 billion. As amended, for
fiscal 2016 it would call for allowing $96 billion in uncapped war-related
funding to provide additional defense funding beyond sequester-reduced
caps, without requiring offsets.” The bill was adopted by a vote of
228-199. [CQ, 3/25/15 <http://www.cq.com/vote/2015/h/142>; H. Con. Res. 27,
Vote 142,3/25/15 <http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2015/roll142.xml>]

· 35,000 Nevadans Received Pell Grants To Help Pay For College. [White
House Report, Republican Budget Resolutions: Same Failed Top-Down Economics,
3/18/15
<https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/docs/budget_resolution_and_sequestration_impacts.pdf>
]

· Republican Budget Eliminates Mandatory Funding For Pell Grants And
Freezes Grants At Their Current Level Instead Of Keeping Pace With
Inflation. “The Republican budgets eliminate mandatory funding for Pell
Grants, and the House budget specifies that it would freeze the maximum
grant at its current level, instead of allowing it to increase to keep pace
with inflation. Over time, this would reduce financial aid for almost all
of the more than 8 million students who rely on Pell Grants to afford
college.” [White House Report, Republican Budget Resolutions: Same Failed
Top-Down Economics,3/18/15
<https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/docs/budget_resolution_and_sequestration_impacts.pdf>
]

· House Republican Budget Elimination Of Mandatory Funding For Pell Grants
Would Likely Force Further Cuts To Eligibility And Benefits. In October
2015, Center on Budget and Policy Priorities CBPP Report on House
Republican budget stated: “The plan freezes the maximum Pell Grant for ten
years, even as tuition and room and board costs will continue to rise.  It
also eliminates Pell Grant funding on the mandatory side of the budget
(Pell Grants receive both mandatory and discretionary funding, as explained
below), likely forcing further cuts in eligibility and benefits.  In
addition, it would make student loans more expensive and cut other
education and training programs (see box).” [Center on Budget and Policy
Priorities, “House Budget Committee Plan Cuts Pell Grants Deeply, Reducing
Access to Higher Education,”10/21/15
<http://www.cbpp.org/sites/default/files/atoms/files/3-24-15bud.pdf>]

· CBO: Eliminating Mandatory Funding For Pell Grants Would Increase Costs
For Students – Students Who Borrowed $23,000 Would “Leave School With
Additional Debt Of About $3,800 Because Of The Accrued Interest Costs.” In
November 2014, the Congressional Budget Office Estimated impact of
eliminating mandatory spending on student loans: “Under either alternative,
borrowers who lost access to subsidized loans would pay interest on
unsubsidized loans from the date of loan disbursement, which would raise
their costs. If a student who would have borrowed $23,000 (the lifetime
limit) through subsidized loans over five years beginning with the
2014–2015 academic year instead borrowed the same amount through
unsubsidized loans, that student would leave school with additional debt of
about $3,800 because of the accrued interest costs. Over a typical 10-year
repayment period, the student’s monthly payment would be $43 higher than if
he or she had borrowed that same amount through subsidized loans.”
[Congressional Budget Office, Reduce or Eliminate Subsidized Loans for
Undergraduate Students, 11/13/13
<https://www.cbo.gov/budget-options/2013/44741>]

Heck Voted For GOP Student Loan Bill That Would Raise Student Loan Interest
Rates When Treasury Rates Rise. In May 2013, Heck voted for: “Under the GOP
proposal, student loans would be reset every year, pegged to 10-year
Treasury notes with added percentage points. For instance, students who
receive subsidized or unsubsidized Stafford student loans would pay the
Treasury rate, plus 2.5 percentage points starting for loans issued after
July 1. Current subsidized Stafford loans are offered at a fixed 3.4
percent rate and unsubsidized Stafford loans are offered at 6.8 percent.
The interest rate on loans to parents and graduate students is 7.9 percent.
Using Congressional Budget Office projections, the GOP plan would translate
to a 5 percent interest rate on all Stafford loans in 2014, but the rate
would climb to 7.7 percent for loans in 2023. ‘We're ripping off kids,’
said Rep. Peter Welch, D-Vt. Stafford loan rates would be capped at 8.5
percent, while loans for parents and graduate students would have a 10.5
percent ceiling under the GOP plan.” [Associated Press, 5/24/13
<https://www.memphisdailynews.com/news/2013/may/24/house-backs-variable-rate-student-loans/print>;
H.R. 1911, Vote 183, 5/23/13 <http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2013/roll183.xml>]

· Associated Press: “The GOP Plan Would Cost Students And Families
Heavily.” “In real dollars, the GOP plan would cost students and families
heavily, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service. The
office used the CBO projections for Treasury notes' interest rates each
year.” [Associated Press, 5/22/13
<http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/obama-threatens-veto-house-student-loan-plan>
]

· Students With Subsidized Stafford Loans Would Pay Almost $5,000 More Over
10 Years In Real Dollars. “In real dollars, the GOP plan would cost
students and families heavily, according to the nonpartisan Congressional
Research Service. The office used the CBO projections for Treasury notes'
interest rates each year. Students who max out their subsidized Stafford
loans over four years would pay $8,331 in interest payments under the
Republican bill, and $3,450 if rates were kept at 3.4 percent. If rates
were allowed to double in July, that amount would be $7,284 over the
typical 10-year window to repay the maximum $19,000.” [Associated Press,
5/22/13
<http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/obama-threatens-veto-house-student-loan-plan>
]

Heck Voted To Defund Prosecutorial Discretion For Illegal Immigrants In
FY2014 Homeland Security Appropriations Bill. In June 2013, Heck voted for
a: “King, R-Iowa, amendment that would bar the use of funds provided in the
bill to finalize, implement, administer, or enforce a number of policies
and memorandums within the Homeland Security Department, including ones
pertaining to prosecutorial discretion for illegal immigrants who came to
the United States as children.” The amendment passed by 224-201. [CQ, 6/6/13
<http://www.cq.com/doc/floorvote-239805000>, H.R. 2217, Vote 208, 6/6/13
<http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2013/roll208.xml>]

· Heck Voted Against Giving Temporary Legal Status To DREAMers. In June
2013 the Las Vegas Review-Journal wrote, “The House in a party-line vote
last week passed an amendment that roiled the debate over immigration.
Lawmakers voted 224-201 to stop President Barack Obama’s policy that grants
temporary legal status to young people who were brought into the country
illegally as children. All but six Republicans voted for it; all but three
Democrats voted against it. The amendment’s impact would fall on the
so-called DREAMers, residents in their teens and 20s who faced potential
deportation and who are a key constituency affected by the overhaul of the
immigration law… Reps. Joe Heck and Mark Amodei, both R-Nev, voted for the
amendment. Reps. Dina Titus and Steven Horsford, both D-Nev., voted against
it.” [Las Vegas Review-Journal, 6/9/13
<http://www.reviewjournal.com/news/government/washington-digest-house-blocks-obamas-immigration-policy>
]

Heck Voted For FY2015 Homeland Security Appropriations Bill That Would Bar
Funds To Implement Obama Administration Immigration Policies. In January
2015, Heck voted for: “Passage of the bill would provide $47.8 billion in
fiscal 2015 for the Homeland Security Department and related activities.
The bill would include $12.6 billion for Customs and Border Protection;
$6.3 billion for Immigration and Customs Enforcement; $7.2 billion for the
Transportation Security Administration, including fees; $10 billion for the
Coast Guard; $1.7 billion for the Secret Service; and $10.8 billion for the
Federal Emergency Management Agency, including $6.4 billion for emergency
disaster relief. As amended the bill would bar the use of funds to
implement the administration's immigration policies or to grant any federal
benefit to any illegal immigrant as a result of those policies.” The bill
passed by 236-191. [CQ, 1/14/15 <http://www.cq.com/doc/floorvote-247135000>,
H.R. 240, Vote 35, 1/14/15 <http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2015/roll035.xml>]

· The Bill Would Block Funding For President Obama’s 2014 Immigration
Order, And Halt The DACA Program.“The House voted Wednesday to block
funding for President Obama’s immigration orders, firing the first shot in
a high-stakes battle over deferred deportations for the millions of people
who are in the country illegally. The measure passed in a 236-191 vote,
with 10 Republicans voting against it and two Democrats voting in favor.
Democrats rallied against the bill, which would fund the Department of
Homeland Security (DHS) through September, after Republicans adopted a
series of contentious amendments that take aim at facets of Obama’s
immigration policy. One of the amendments would choke off funding for
Obama’s executive action announced in November, which would allow some
illegal immigrants to stay in the country and obtain work permits. A second
amendment would halt the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals Program
(DACA), which lifts deportation for some illegal immigrants who came to the
United States as children. The defunding amendment was adopted in a 237-190
vote, with seven Republicans voting no, while the DACA amendment was
approved 218-209, with 26 Republicans defecting.” [The Hill, 1/14/15
<http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/house/229469-house-votes-to-defund-obamas-immigration-orders>
]

Heck Voted For A Bill To Authorize Congress To Sue The Executive Branch For
Failure To Execute Existing Laws. In March 2014, Heck voted for: “Passage
of the bill that would authorize Congress, upon House or Senate adoption of
a resolution, to sue the executive branch for failure to execute existing
laws. Under the measure, lawsuits would be first heard by a three-judge
panel and could be appealed directly to the Supreme Court. As amended, the
Government Accountability Office would be required to file quarterly
reports on the costs of any lawsuits challenging executive inaction.” The
bill passed by a vote of 233-181. [CQ, 3/12/14
<http://www.cq.com/doc/floorvote-243497000?6&search=gF42FSY4>; HR 4138,
Vote 124, 3/12/14 <http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2014/roll124.xml>]

· The Bill Was Targeted In Part At The Administration’s Decision Not To
Deport “Dreamers.” “The House passed a measure Wednesday that would
expedite lawsuits brought by Congress against a president who fails to
fully enforce federal laws. The Republican-backed measure passed 233 to 181
and was the latest in a string of Republican measures designed to calm
their divided ranks by raising doubts about President Obama's leadership
during a midterm election year. […] Before the vote, GOP lawmakers blasted
the Obama administration Wednesday for failing to fully enforce several
federal laws, including the Affordable Care Act, current immigration
policy, sentencing laws and the federal ban on same-sex marriage. […]
Immigration activists reacted angrily and cited debate on the bill in the
House Judiciary Committee, where several Republicans criticized Obama for
deciding not to deport those children, often referred to as ‘dreamers.’ The
DREAM Coalition, a group representing the children of undocumented
immigrants, said the vote ‘demonstrates Republicans can no longer be relied
upon to bring up a sensible and practicable immigration reform bill this
year.’” [Washington Post, 3/12/14
<https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2014/03/12/house-passes-bill-making-it-easier-for-congress-to-sue-the-president/>
]

Heck Voted For FY2015 Homeland Security Appropriations Bill That Would Bar
Funds To Implement Obama Administration Immigration Policies. In January
2015, Heck voted for: “Passage of the bill would provide $47.8 billion in
fiscal 2015 for the Homeland Security Department and related activities.
The bill would include $12.6 billion for Customs and Border Protection;
$6.3 billion for Immigration and Customs Enforcement; $7.2 billion for the
Transportation Security Administration, including fees; $10 billion for the
Coast Guard; $1.7 billion for the Secret Service; and $10.8 billion for the
Federal Emergency Management Agency, including $6.4 billion for emergency
disaster relief. As amended the bill would bar the use of funds to
implement the administration's immigration policies or to grant any federal
benefit to any illegal immigrant as a result of those policies.” The bill
passed by 236-191. [CQ, 1/14/15 <http://www.cq.com/doc/floorvote-247135000>,
H.R. 240, Vote 35, 1/14/15 <http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2015/roll035.xml>]

· The Bill Would Block Funding For President Obama’s 2014 Immigration
Order, And Halt The DACA Program.“The House voted Wednesday to block
funding for President Obama’s immigration orders, firing the first shot in
a high-stakes battle over deferred deportations for the millions of people
who are in the country illegally. The measure passed in a 236-191 vote,
with 10 Republicans voting against it and two Democrats voting in favor.
Democrats rallied against the bill, which would fund the Department of
Homeland Security (DHS) through September, after Republicans adopted a
series of contentious amendments that take aim at facets of Obama’s
immigration policy. One of the amendments would choke off funding for
Obama’s executive action announced in November, which would allow some
illegal immigrants to stay in the country and obtain work permits. A second
amendment would halt the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals Program
(DACA), which lifts deportation for some illegal immigrants who came to the
United States as children. The defunding amendment was adopted in a 237-190
vote, with seven Republicans voting no, while the DACA amendment was
approved 218-209, with 26 Republicans defecting.” [The Hill, 1/14/15
<http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/house/229469-house-votes-to-defund-obamas-immigration-orders>
]

###