Obama threatens veto of House GOP student interest rate bill

By Pete Kasperowicz - 04/27/12 10:29 AM ET

The Obama administration on Friday threatened to veto a House Republican bill that would keep the interest rate on federally subsidized student loans low for another year, and pay for it by eliminating a federal preventive health program.

"Unfortunately, rather than finding common ground on a way to pay for this critical policy, H.R. 4628 includes an attempt to repeal the Prevention and Public Health Fund, created to help prevent disease, detect it early, and manage conditions before they become severe," the White House said.

"Women, in particular, will benefit from this Prevention Fund, which would provide for hundreds of thousands of screenings for breast and cervical cancer," it added. "This is a politically-motivated proposal and not the serious response that the problem facing America's college students deserves.

"If the President is presented with H.R. 4628, his senior advisors would recommend that he veto the bill."

The House started taking up its proposal shortly after 10 a.m., and was expected to pass it by the early afternoon. Republicans have called the healthcare money a "slush fund" that gives the Department of Health and Human Services discretionary spending authority for any purpose it wants.

"The bill would eliminate the remaining $12 billion from the so-called Prevention and Public Health fund, which in truth is nothing more than an open-ended fund that has no clear oversight or purpose," Rep. Judy Biggert (R-Ill.) said on the House floor Friday morning.

"At best, this fund serves only to circumvent the Congress's annual appropriations responsibilities by granting, in perpetuity, the Secretary of Health and Human Services unabridged discretion to direct billions of taxpayer dollars under the loose label of prevention programs."

Democrats have said Republicans are only supportive of keeping the student interest rate low because of the attention given to the issue by President Obama, and that attacking the health fund is an attack on women and children.

"Cynically, some might say, the only way they can find to pay for it is to attack women's health and children's health," said Rep. John Tierney (D-Mass.).