Raising College Tuition Is A Tax Increase
Nevada’s Governor Gibbons and Chancellor Rogers are proposing to increase tuition in a state that received an F grade on its affordability rating in the 2006 National Report Card on Higher Education as a part of the governor’s plan to mitigate the state budget crises. From the report:
Nevada’s under performance in educating its young population could limit the state’s access to a competitive workforce and weaken its economy over time. As the well-educated baby boomer generation begins to retire, the diverse young population that will replace it does not appear prepared educationally to maintain or enhance the state’s position in a global economy….Since the early 1990s, colleges and universities in Nevada have become less affordable for students and their families. If Nevada’s trends are not addressed, they could undermine the state’s ability to develop an educated workforce.
Its not a surprise that the state is trying to balance the budget on higher education’s back. The country and the state have a history of cutting education budgets during bad budget years. but not reinstating the lost funds during years of economic recovery according to a study released in 2006, sponsored by the Lumina Foundation for Education:
Given that state budgets — even if relatively healthy now — are bound to experience recessions again, the news is not good for higher education. Among the researchers’ findings:
- Between 1979 and 2004, state appropriations for higher education did not keep up with growth in state economies (measured as Gross State Product) in any state.
- When recessions hit the United States, each one seems to hurt higher education more intensely than the one before — with longer recovery times. Appropriations per FTE declined in 26 states following the 1980 recession, in 38 states following the 1990-91 recession, and in 44 states following the 2001 recession.
- In three of the last four recessions, tuition increased faster than the availability of state student aid, and faster than the growth in family income and student aid.
- The impact of the 2001 recession (which was followed by 9/11) was particularly destructive even though, in duration, that recession was relatively short. Shifts in state support for students from need- to merit-based aid have made it more difficult for needy students to deal with tuition increases.
As if raising tuition isn’t a tax. Regressive though it may be, a tax is a tax and raising tuition in state in which students and their families already pay a disproportionate percentage of their net income for college is not very smart. Do you think the next governor will propose a tuition cut once the state budget is back in order? Of course not. We’ve seen how states use higher education to balance their budgets. In a state that has one of the poorest college attendance and graduation rates in the country, raising tuition seems to be about the worst thing they could possibly do. Enjoy the protests!
Similar Posts:
Enjoy this post? Leave a comment below or subscribe to my feed. You also can sign up for email delivery by clicking here.
Trackbacks & Pingbacks
Comments
Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
Maybe Gibbons wants people to leave the state? In that case, he needs to close down the Commission on Economic Development. No point in creating new jobs or economic diversification.
What a stupid bastard.
Less affordable? Is this some kind of stupid joke? You can attend Nevada, as an in-state resident for 5 years, and still pay less than if you went out of state to a California UC for two years! That report is bogus and anyone that believes college at UNLV and Nevada is overpriced has unreal expectations for obtaining a college degree. I say raise the tuition and raise the GPA and SAT requirements! The world needs ditch diggers too, or they can just go to UNLV!
If you make the grade in Nevada, you go to college on the Millennium Scholarship. If we don’t raise this “tax”, which tax do you support?
Isn’t a “tax” something that is placed on everyone while a “fee” is only paid by the person using the service? How can this be a “tax” increase?
It could actually be argued that raising tuition is tax relief. The more money that students pay (toward the same overall cost of education, which would be the case if spending was actually not increasing), the less that the actual taxpayers (those not using the service of higher ed) have to cover. State schools are very expensive on the state’s taxpayers, so any of that cost that can be picked up by those using the service should be welcomed.
This post works on a couple of assumptions. First, you need to understand what what a regressive tax is. Second, you need to acknowledge the fact that the state needs more college graduates. And third, the point about affordabilty is based the income of Nevadans and the percentage of that income that is spent on a college education. What education costs in California is irrelevant.
Calling it regressive doesn’t make it a tax. Pi had it right–it’s a fee. Whether it’s a fee worthy of talking about in terms of how much the state needs it is another matter. Calling it a tax is incorrect.