Subject: *Compromise* (short email) + reply to
Joni Shockey (Tue 27 Sept 2016)
To: Kyle Glenn, c/o Elect Dennis Ross campaign
office
863-286-5762 or e-mail Cc:
Shelee@ElectDennisRoss.com Post
Office Box 7310, Lakeland, FL 33807-7310
Cc: Joni Shockey, Esq., Communications Director /
D.C. Scheduler
c/o: Rep. Dennis A. Ross (R-FL-15th), 229 Cannon HOB,
Washington, D.C. 20515
T (202) 225-1252, F (202) 226-0585, Hours: Monday -
Friday 8:30 a.m. - 5:30 p.m.
Cc: Marco Rubio for Senate 2016,
https://MarcoRubio.com PO Box Box 558701,
Miami, FL 33255-8701
PO Box 661537, Miami, FL 33266-1537
Cc: Caleb Orr, HIGHER ED Policy staffer:
https://twitter.com/_caleborr
Cc: Eduardo F. Sacasa, HIGHER ED Legislative
Correspondent ; Cf: “Alex,” phone staffer
c/o: Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL), 284
Russell Senate Office Building
Washington DC, 20510, Phone:
202-224-3041
Cc: Donald J. Trump for President, Inc. c/o: The
Trump Organization
725 Fifth Avenue New York, NY 10022, Phone:
646-736-1779
and: 721 5th Avenue, Manhattan, NY 10022
Kyle:
Many people (especially Democrat friends) have insisted that Congressman
Ross was purposefully deceptive and lied to us to get our vote; however, I know
Dennis (and have known him for a while), and I don't believe he had any
intention to lie us. Nonetheless, Bill Thompson, the opinions editor of The
Lakeland Ledger, who published my recent guest column, also believes Dennis said
he supported student loan bankruptcy –and went so far as to say, paraphrasing:
“Gordon, I believe you, but I won't publish this claim unless you can offer me
proof he said that.” As you know, I sent Bill a link to the THM, and he listened
to it, believed me, & then, of course, published my guest column: "A Polk
Perspective: Fix our bankrupt policy on student debt," By Gordon Wayne Watts,
Guest columnist, The Ledger, August 04, 2016 -
www.TheLedger.com/article/20160804/COLUMNISTS03/160809884/1382/edit?p=all&tc=pgall
Here's the bottom line: I'm disappointed that Dennis was unclear, &
moreover, I'm even more disappointed that he doesn't support legislation which
polls suggest that the majority of Americans want for college students. For that
reason, I was thinking of voting, instead, for the conservative Democrat
challenger, Jim Lange, who's a former Reagan Republican upset at how the GOP has
treated the middle class, and who vehemently hates abortion & wishes to
reduce it to zero (even if he disagrees on the means to get there). **HOWEVER**
I offer a compromise, something very easy; if Dennis can do this, I'll give
him:
1.My vote; and,
2.My support; and,
3.My endorsement (which may
include another OpEd, if I can get on The Ledger's good side!)
(Let me remind you that this is 1 better than Ted Cruz gave Donald Trump,
getting a cc copy of my email, here: Cruz gave a pledge to vote for and support
Mr. Trump –but stopped short of a formal 'endorsement,' apparently to keep his
base happy.)
Even Joni, who vehemently disagreed with my interpretation on Dennis'
comments on a proposed “cure” (e.g., bankruptcy), admits in her email (see
below) that he still agrees with me on the proposed “prevention,” namely she
agrees with me that Congressman Ross agrees that “the government should not be
in the business of providing student loans.” (And, she is correct: Listen to the
THM audio, above, or take a look at Dennis' own webpage, here:
http://DennisRoss.house.gov/issues/issue/?IssueID=17117
He goes even farther than I'm asking here: He wants to eliminate the DOE [Dept
of Education], a great idea, even if politically difficult!)
So, here's my compromise: While it seems likely that Dennis doesn't support
college loan bankruptcy (or at least, as a standalone solution), we all agree
that he agrees with me (and many other conservatives) that “the government
should not be in the business of providing student loans.” **THEREFORE** I give
my word of honour that I will vote for Dennis if he supports any combination of
the solutions in question, whether bankruptcy (a cure), elimination of the DOE
(a drastic prevention measure), or (as I suggest) a much more modest
“preventative” measure: Slowly reducing loan limits that were raised on taxpayer
dollars used for college loans – a result of the bad John Boehner bill that I
reference on my guest column, published at the Ledger & elsewhere.
***
CONCLUSION *** – Kyle, I'm lowering the bar “as low as it
will go” to “meet Dennis halfway,” and make it easy for him to get my vote.
**NONETHELESS** I have looked at the Congressional calender, and this Friday
(Fri 30 Sept 2016), it lists: “D.C. Work Week Votes no later than 3:00 p.m.” –
Dennis has been in office for ages, and has done nothing to make sure that “the
government should not be in the business of providing student loans,” and so
here is his big chance to act on his beliefs & get my vote. Does this
work?
To help you navigate this puzzle, please
find the following attachments:
House & Senate Calendars to keep you from being late to submit
a bill:
“2016_ANNUAL_CALENDAR2.pdf” “2016_SENATE_calendar.pdf”
“2016-MONTHLY-CALENDAR.pdf”
Here's a very mild bill that will lower the loan limits to
accomplish Dennis' stated goal & make sure “the government should not be in
the business of providing student loans” - plus homework showing my bill is
good: “one-of-several-BAD-BILLS-109hr507ih.pdf” -and-
“one-of-several-GREAT-proposed-BILLS-114hr-GWW-proposed-ih.pdf” -and-
“selected-US-Code-on-Loan-Limits.pdf”
For reference purposes here a copy of the other bill, which Joni
& Melissa say Dennis doesn't
support:
“one-of-several-GREAT-House-BILLS-114hr449ih.pdf” (just in
case he changes his mind)
Statement on Dept of Education:
“DennisRoss-on-EDUCATION.pdf”
Statement on decline in how bankruptcy affects availability of
loans: “DennisRossFacebookEmailProof.pdf”
My column, in 2 formats – one with
commentary:
“TheLedger-Online-PDF-FairUse-cache-WATTS-GuestColumn-Thr04Aug2016.pdf”
“TheLedger-print-version-WATTS-GuestColumn-Thr04Aug2016.pdf”
** PS ** – I'm including Sen. Marco Rubio a copy of my email to you because
I offer him the same deal. (Except, in Rubio's case, I'll “make it even easier”
& settle for a public statement or promise to introduce or sponsor such
legislation, since I haven't given him as much notice as I have Rep. Ross, who's
been aware of this problem for several years. Alex, who answered my phone call
to his DC office, agreed with me that it'd be OK to cc his 2 HigherEd staffers.)
Other than that, I'll vote for the Democrat, Patrick Murphy, who used to be a
Republican (and hold my nose while I vote, as he is fiscally more conservative,
but more socially more liberal). The Senate looks like it's in session 'til
October 07, 2016, so Rubio has a little more time to get my vote. On the other
hand, I'm NOT offering this deal to Hillary Clinton's campaign because, while
she has promised “Free College” (which is a historically sound idea, and one
which America used to offer), she's lied so much that this cancels out
everything she might (or might not) say (or promise). Her track record as a
Senator is a train-wreck of do-nothing: She sponsored S.3255 - Student Borrower
Bill of Rights Act of 2006 [109th Congress (2005-2006)], but she lied about her
wishes here (as evidenced by the fact that she dropped S.3255 like a sack of
potatoes when big banks bought her off with campaign contributions). – Mr. Trump
is getting my vote here, **PERIOD** but, in all honesty, his campaign hasn't
addressed this issue, so I'm including them a cc copy.
Sincerely,
Gordon
***** -- Subject: “...reply to Joni
Shockey”
Joni, thank you for replying to me, below, with **very** excellent
attention to detail.
I tender my apologies for being slow to see (and respond) to your reply,
last week (Mon 19 Sept 2016), but I don't check my alternate email account as
much as my main one. (You weren't wrong to reply to it, as I had to use GMail
one day, when my AOL account went frizzy on me - Free email LOL). In the future,
you're welcome to respond to both (or even all) of my email addresses, "just to
be on the safe side."
As you recall, I replied, briefly, to you that
Thursday (22 Sept 2016), but I had some appointments & couldn't give the
proper attention to your email that I felt you deserve (plus, I made numerous
typos LOL), so I'm 'pulling a mulligan' (golf terminology) & asking if it
would be OK for me to have a “do over,” as your hard work deserves a
reply. Before I forget, I have a question: I've heard of talk of a debate
between Congressman Ross and his challenger Jim Lange, but I've seen no
specifics in the newspaper, only talk. Do you know if there's a debate
scheduled, and, if so, when & where?
Also, I'm sure Melissa was not offended by this, but I wanted make sure
& acknowledge her efforts & good intents here & to apologize to her
for not giving her credit for an excellent point she made: I had compared the
'real' 2nd Amendment with the bankruptcy, which I nicknamed the 'Economic 2nd
Amendment,' and Melissa rightly pointed out that the Constitution doesn't
guarantee a right to bankruptcy. She was (and is) right, but 2 points: First,
while no right to bankruptcy (for college loans or any loan for that matter)
exists, the Constitution's uniformity clause, cited elsewhere (Art. 1, sec. 8,
cl. 4) does say that IF there's bk law, it must be uniform. (As you know,
current US bankruptcy law is NOT uniform! Does the US Constitution matter any
more? What have we become as a nation...)
Secondly, I was simply making a comparison here: Bankruptcy serves as a
"means of defense" against predatory lending. Also, I apologize to **all** of
you for 2 other things: First, I know the Congressman works for me, but, by no
means, do I wish to be an “overbearing boss.” I've spend greater than usual time
with your combined labour, but Dennis' statements & letters were very
unclear, confusing both myself, Bill Thompson (at the Ledger) & numerous
others, and we needed extra time. Also, the policy you say Dennis suggests,
while not all bad, will **crash** the US Dollar if not reversed, and so I beg
your understanding: This is no small issue! Also, I apologize for my fellow
advocates for their silence: We deserve to lose, since very few are speaking up
to defend me. (In all fairness, though, no letters, op-eds, editorials, or
columns have defended your interpretation of what is good policy, either.)
This Saturday (24 Sept 2016), I spent all day working the phones at the
Lakeland, Fla. GOP headquarters at 1833 S. Fla. Ave., to “stump for Trump,” and
I was sore from head-to-toe the next day. – But, I have a little more free time
today, so I'll answer your other points, as they deserve a reply:
First, I'll address your point where you claim that Congressman Ross
doesn't support bankruptcy for college loans. I admit that you may be right (and
if you or Melissa say that Dennis explicitly told you that this is what he
meant, then I must take your word). But, in all honesty, you know that boatloads
of experts & professionals listened to the selfsame THM that you reference
below (thank you for correcting my misspelling of the word 'capital' where I
wrongly used the word 'capitol'), and we all heard a different story. Indeed,
when reading his bankruptcy comments, this must be taken “in context” with his
comment that banks must take the risk. This is not unlike the legal concept of
“In Pari Materia,” where Statutes “in pari materia,” even if enacted at
different times – but especially, as here, spoken at the same time, must be
interpreted in light of each other since they have a common purpose for
comparable events or items:
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/in+pari+materiahttp://definitions.uslegal.com/i/in-pari-materia/
Since there is no risk (or little risk) for a bank when students can not
execute a bankruptcy, the context would suggest that Mr. Ross was supporting
bankruptcy (where the banks **are** at risk!).
Secondly, you correctly quoted Dennis as saying: “...and if a person can't
pay back, then we go back to your Bankruptcy Laws,” and the key phrase, here, is
“we go back to”: The “plain language” meaning here is that 'back' refers to
previous in time or chronology, e.g., “back when bankruptcy” was allowed under
realistic (not nearly impossible 'Undue Hardship') standard.
Third, and last, here, Dennis was good enough to reply to me by email on
Sept. 13, 2016, and apparently Tim Cummings was the one to whom he dictated his
letter (signed “DR/TC” at the bottom). [Mr. Rubio almost never replies, either
via an aide and probably not personally LOL.] Dennis said, in his letter, that:
“This is a complex issue, and one that cannot be solved with simply allowing
students to discharge their student loan debt through bankruptcy or
forgiveness.”
I agree with him if he meant that he is opposed to “simply” using one or
both of these options, but is open to a multifaceted approach. (If this is what
he meant, then you and I are both wrong: Dennis would be against bankruptcy
and/or loan forgiveness, if used in isolation, “simply” by themselves, but not
necessarily against a multi-pronged approach. If this is what he means, then I
agree – both prevention and cure must be used in combination. Only he knows what
he meant here, and maybe we can revisit this issue & ask him – and,
hopefully, to be fair/complete, also consult other constituents for feedback, as
well.)
Next, you said that: “With that said, Congressman Ross does not plan to
cosponsor H.R. 449, the Discharge Student Loans in Bankruptcy Act, or similar
legislation, because he believes we should focus more on helping students repay
their student loans and improve their credit rather than promote irresponsible
and credit-damaging bankruptcy and, essentially, free college education.”
I disagree on 2 counts: First, as I've shown in other places, it violates
both Equal Protection as well as the Uniformity Clause to have unequal
bankruptcy law (and numerous other constitutional and case law standards).
Moreover, it is inherently unfair in a “moral” sense of the word. (I'm not going
to preach to you: you may believe as you like. But Dennis and I both claim to be
Christians, yet for him to demand that he and his cronies have bankruptcy, but
not college students, violates the clear commands of Jesus in the New Testament
Bible, at Luke 11:46 and Matthew 23:3-4 where he says lawyers put heavy burdens
on others, that they, themselves, refuse to bear, and lack of bankruptcy is but
one burden.)
Secondly, Joni, your assertion that bankruptcy equates to a free college
education is incorrect: While, yes, I admit that it is theoretically possible to
have 100% of a loan discharged in bankruptcy, using the 'Credit Card' standard
that I claim would make US Law constitutional, nonetheless, you well know that
there is no guarantee that **any** discharge will take place, and, in fact, we
all know that usually the debtor will still have to pay back some of the loan,
depending on what the bankruptcy court decided.
Moreover, I may not have told anyone yet, but I will state for the record:
I am on IBR (Income Based Repayment), which caps my payments at 10% of my
'discretionary' income, that is, the income above-and-beyond the poverty level.
Since I live well-below poverty, my yearly payments are 10% of **zero** which is
**zero**, and I am “protected” from the full brunt of the storm, and therefore
any change in law will not help me at all. (In fact, it may make matters worse!)
So, if I'm fully-protected, why am I complaining? Well, even if I am protected
from this debt, nonetheless, inaction by Congress ***WILL*** bankruptcy the US
Dollar since taxpayer dollars make and back (guarantee) these toxic, predatory
loans: College Debt is at like 1.5 Trillion, almost 10% of total US Debt, and
the bubble WILL burst, making America =equal= to the Titanic, and the ship, WHEN
it sinks, will take me down too. I don't want to see this happen... do
you?..
I know that this is a complex issue (and, in all fairness, I believe that
the student should pay something, and not put the full weight on the
government), but when the full weight is placed on the student (and the
taxpayer, who backs these predatory loans), and no weight is placed on the banks
& universities (who make “big dollar” salaries), this is like placing all
your weight on one leg, and none on the other: You know this would be inherently
unhealthy. Since college used to be free in America (and is presently free in
Germany & other developed nations), and seeing how 'free' college was the
best in the world in our past, it makes no sense that more dollars are charged
for less quality. (This is not unlike how Dennis says on his website that the
District of Columbia's 'voucher' program spends less and does more than public
education schools.)
Lastly, since you and Dennis seem to think that bankruptcy is not good, let
me point out that his June 02, 2011 Facebook email (back when he replied
personally, or thru an aide) admitted that: “Allowing discharge in bankruptcy
for student loans would cause a sharp decline in availability of loans.” Dennis
(or an aide emailing on his behalf) was correct: This would scare off lenders,
but if this scares off the Dept of Education, which uses tax dollars to lend,
would that not accomplish his other stated goal, namely to get the government
out of the business of making college loans? Do you remember Dr. Bill Bennett,
the Secretary of Education under Pres. Ronald Reagan? The 'Bennett Hypothesis,'
so named after Dr. Bennett, asserted that when you subsidize something, the
price goes up. (Of course! They are able to price-gouge students with
stupid-high tuition because the students have “deep pockets” loans, which is yet
another word-picture of why I want Dennis to act on his beliefs, namely to get
the government out of the business of college loans, which distort the
Conservative Free Market, as evidenced by tuition that flies up much faster than
the CPI!)
Even though I may have appeared harsh, I am only prosecuting my case, and
do not wish to offend you.
Thank you, again, for the time & effort you put into reviewing &
replying to my last email.
Anyhow, are there going to be any debates? Do you know? Thank you.
Gordon
In a message dated 9/20/2016 6:28:51 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
gww1210@gmail.com <Gordon Wayne Watts>
writes:
---------- Forwarded message
----------
From:
Shockey, Joni <Joni.Shockey@mail.house.gov>Date:
Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 3:16 PM
Subject: RE: In reply to Kyle Glenn: cc:
Melissa Robel
To: "
gww1210@gmail.com" <
gww1210@gmail.com>
Gordon,
Thank you for
your email. As for your assertion that Congressman Ross stated he supports
bankruptcy for student loans, we respectfully disagree with your
interpretation of his statement.
In the Telephone
Town Hall transcript you provided, Congressman Ross never once said he
believes student loans should be afforded the same debt forgiveness that
bankruptcy laws provide for other forms of debt. The transcript shows you
asked Congressman Ross a hypothetical question about what he could tell you
about student loan debt being forgiven through bankruptcy, and he answered
with a hypothetical statement, saying (1) the government should not be in the
business of providing student loans, and (2) private capital should be allowed
to enter the student loan market. It seems your assertion that Congressman
Ross stated student loans should be afforded bankruptcy rights derives from
his further explanation of his hypothetical answer regarding private capital
student loans.
The explanation
Congressman Ross is transcribed as giving states:
We should invite
more private capital, we should make it more competitive, and let the banks
take the risks: That's what they're in the business of doing. And, if they
take the risk, and if a person can't pay back , then we go back to your
Bankruptcy Laws, which, umm... You know, the Bankruptcy Laws right now... If a
student does file for Bankruptcy, they can have all other debt discharged—but
their Student Loans.
This explanation
is a continuance of Congressman Ross’ hypothetical answer that if banks were
permitted to participate more in the student loan market, and a student
received a loan from a bank and was unable to repay that loan, then we would
refer to current bankruptcy laws to see if the loan provided by the bank would
qualify for bankruptcy, depending on the type of loan, and its terms and
conditions. Congressman Ross further explains that as bankruptcy laws stand
right now, most student loans do not qualify for bankruptcy. This explanation
in no way advocates for or agrees with allowing federal and/or government
student loans to qualify for bankruptcy.
As for student
loan legislation, however, Congressman Ross has always supported helping
students repay their loans in ways that are beneficial to them, and potential
employers. With that said, Congressman Ross does not plan to co-sponsor H.R.
449, the Discharge Student Loans in Bankruptcy Act, or similar legislation,
because he believes we should focus more on helping students repay their
student loans and improve their credit rather than promote irresponsible and
credit-damaging bankruptcy and, essentially, free college education.
However, if you
are interested in learning more about a few current student loan bankruptcy
options, we encourage you to visit http://www.studentloanborrowerassistance.org/bankruptcy/,
which provides information on bankruptcy qualification for certain student
loans and circumstances.
As always,
Congressman Ross and our office greatly appreciate your advice, input and
advocacy. Congressman Ross could not effectively represent Florida’s 15th
Congressional District without constituents like you who are active and vocal
in our legislative process and government. Congressman Ross and our office
look forward to an open discussion about how we can further improve our
community, state and nation as a whole. Thank you, again, for your passion and
advocacy.
Sincerely,
Joni Shockey,
Esq.
Communications
Director / D.C. Scheduler
Rep. Dennis A.
Ross (FL-15)
229 Cannon
HOB
From: Robel, Melissa
Sent: Monday, September 12, 2016 1:14 PM
To: Shockey,
Joni; Cummings, Timothy; Moody, Kourtney
Subject: FW: In reply to
Kyle Glenn: cc: Melissa Robel
…
Re: Automatic reply: Thunderclap comments applauding BUT
ALSO critical of Con...
OK. Here's a resend. I'm not sure if this is related to
the Financial Services Committee, but as it involved ZIKA funding (as one
subject) and the use of tax $$ to back (guarantee) college loans (as the other
subject, along with the bankruptcy for college loans request), it all appears
financial in nature, so I'm forwarding along, as you suggest. -- The original
email appears below - and the same attachments have been reattached; see the
cc line above & the message below.
PS: I'm re-sending from my
GMail account because AOL is acting stupid with this (false) message: "You can
only send one e-mail at a time. Please wait for the current e-mail to be
sent, then try again.
(13:03:35)"
Thank you for your
message. I am currently taking some personal time out of the office
without access to this email until November 15, 2016. If you need
immediate assistance within the office of Congressman Dennis A. Ross, please
contact 202-225-1252.
If you have questions
related to the Financial Services Committee, please contact Melissa Robel
here: Melissa.Robel@mail.house.gov
While
I am out of the office, I can also be reached here: Kyle.P.Glenn@gmail.com
-----Original
Message-----
From: Gww1210@aol.com <Gordon
Wayne Watts>
Date: Monday, 12
September 2016, 11:47:03am -0400 (EST-EDT)
Subject: Thunderclap comments
applauding BUT ALSO critical of Congressman Ross
To: kyle.glenn@mail.house.gov, Gww1210@aol.com
CC: info@electjimlange.com, Joni.Shocke@mail.house.gov,
bill.thompson@theledger.com, lenore.devore@theledger.com,
lenore.beecken@theledger.com, kevin.drake@ledgermediagroup.com,
kevin.drake@theledger.com, lynne.maddox@theledger.com,
gww1210@gmail.com
In a message dated 9/12/2016 11:47:13 A.M. Eastern Daylight
Time, Gww1210@aol.com <Gordon W. Watts>
writes:
cached
here in a 'Fair Use' copy of the article in question:
I
applaud and commend Congressman Ross for his call for a clean
'Zika' bill - and I specifically make reference to you, Joni (but I do
not mention you by name), and I also reference you, Jim, as a possible
recipient of my vote come November 2016 in House race, U.S. District
15.
Since
I mention Dennis, Joni (anonymously, but by reference) and Jim Lange (by
name), I am sending all 3 of them a copy of my comments -- they are linked
above, referenced in several social mediæ (plural of "media"), it is only
fair I send you a link (and see the attachments, where it is in 3 different
formats).
My
email subject line had the word 'Thunderclap' in it because of the use of
numerous social media all at once, and as a cumulative effect from past
op-eds, columns, & editorials.
When
posting to The Lakeland
Ledger's forums, I had to break up my comment into "parts,"
due to character ("word") limitations.
I
like Jim, really, I do, but he will not get my vote this November if Dennis
acts on the 2 bills in question, signing on (cosponsoring HR449 or a similar
bill) as well as the Loan Limits bill I made up out of thin air (and
attached - also - in this email, in a reprise of my prior call). -- I
appreciate Dennis' attempts in past bills, but, really, things like HR1911
-- that bill was horrible, and, as one other Congressman put it https://BobbyScott.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/scott-statement-on-hr-1911-the-making-college-more-expensive-act he
titled his blog entry as "Scott Statement on H.R. 1911, the "Making College
More Expensive Act," and frankly, I agree, and that is a chief reason why
Conservative Review here https://www.ConservativeReview.com/members/dennis-ross/liberty-card/ gives
Dennis such a low score.
In
particular, Dennis voted "for" HR1911 http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2013/roll426.xml but
Conservative Review held that **against** him https://www.conservativereview.com/members/dennis-ross/issue-votes/
-- it's pretty bad when some miscellaneous Democrat (Rep. Bobby Scott,
D-VA-3rd) is more conservative than Dennis. -- Even if HR1911 'helped'
interest rates, it's the *principal* of the loan that's the problem, not the
interest. -- I know time is short, but really... how long does it take to
cosponsor an existing good HR449 bill, one with bipartisan support -
and possibly introduce my reverse-Boehner
bill?
--
Things like this alienate most voters, struggling under heavy college debt,
where a congressman puts on a horse and pony show, but does nothing of
substance. Dennis really cares about us, and I have faith he can honour his
commitments - and do better. College students have gotten victimised by
Unconstitutional bankruptcy law for far too
long.