On Protecting Dodd-Frank, Hillary Should Keep an Eye On Obama

From Hillary Clinton's own "Issues" page, regarding Wall Street, she says this:

Hillary will:

• Veto Republican efforts to repeal or weaken Dodd-Frank.
• Tackle dangerous risks in the big banks and elsewhere in the financial system.
• Hold both individuals and corporations accountable when they break the law.

Well, maybe Hillary should have a talk with her old boss, Barack Obama, about how he's pushing "risks" again in the housing market.  The same risks that caused the housing crisis in the first place.

By going around Dodd-Frank, The President has directed the FHA to force banks to give mortgages to people with substantially less credit worthiness, because Dodd-Frank makes no stipulation about credit scores or minimum down payments.  So, here we are again with the kind of low down payments of just 3% that caused the housing collapse because, once again, a Democrat wants increased home ownership for low income families.  Just like when Bill Clinton was President.  A fact that Hillary Clinton never seems to mention.

I think she should stop worrying about the Republicans weakening Dodd-Frank and worry more about liberals skirting the rules of that law.  In fact, my guess is that she would just follow Obama down that same risky housing lending path should she became President.  Obama and Hillary love to blame Republicans for the housing crisis, but it has always been the Democrats whose hands are bloodied on this one.

References:

Hillary Issues: Wall Street: https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/wall-street/

Obama administration pushes banks to make home loans to people with weaker credit: https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/obama-administration-pushes-banks-to-make-home-loans-to-people-with-weaker-credit/2013/04/02/a8b4370c-9aef-11e2-a941-a19bce7af755_story.html

Subprime Mortgages On March Again, As Obama Pressures Easier Lending: http://www.realclearmarkets.com/articles/2015/12/05/subprime_mortgages_on_march_again_as_obama_pressures_easier_lending_.html

Wells Fargo launches 3% down payment mortgage: http://www.cnbc.com/2016/05/26/wells-fargo-launches-3-down-payment-mortgage.html

pb

Hilllary's Debt-Free College Plan

Probably, the most well known rule of economics is the Law of Supply and Demand. Simply, when demand is higher than supply, prices will rise.  When, supply is higher than demand, prices will fall.

For decades, college tuition has been rising faster than inflation because of high demand and limited supply.  There is just too much money available in the form of loans and grants to send nearly anyone to college; qualified or not.
 
Now, in an effort to garner the votes of current and future college students and their parents, Hillary Clinton has announced a $350 billion dollar tax payer giveaway to essentially make tuition non-existent for public colleges and universities; and, as such, increase demand.  This will do nothing but accelerate the cost of a college education.  And, instead of the student bearing that cost, the tax payer will be on the hook for it.  This is what is so wrong with the "free" mentality of liberal Democrats.

If we want to reverse the high cost of higher education in this country, we need to lower the demand and increase the supply of post-high school education alternatives.  Last December, CBS news reported this:

"At most public universities across the U.S., only 19 percent of full-time students manage to earn their bachelor's degree on time. At flagship schools, which typically serve as the premiere public university in their respective states, 36 percent graduate in four years."

While CBS News (and Hillary) might argue costs as one of the primary reasons for this failure, US News & World Report says that college readiness is the primary reason.

The reality is that we are sending too many people to college who are unprepared.  That is a waste of both time and money and why we need to reduce the demand for college by better screening those who are unprepared to attend.  We shouldn't give loans to people who won't graduate and who won't get good enough jobs to pay those loans back.

At the same time,  this country would be better served by spending billions of dollars to create trade schools in conjunction with major businesses.  We should also invest in alternatives to brick-and-mortar schools with the increase in taxpayer funded online Universities.  That, to me, would be a plan.

References:

Hillary Clinton to roll out $350 billion college plan - CNN.com: http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/10/politics/hillary-clinton-college-affordability/

Why your child won't graduate from college on time: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/why-your-child-wont-graduate-from-college-in-4-years/

High School Students Not Prepared for College, Career: http://www.usnews.com/education/blogs/high-school-notes/2012/08/22/high-school-students-not-prepared-for-college-career