Debate on tuition help

Published April 16, 2014

by Scott Mooneyham, Capitol Press Association, published in Greenville Daily Reflector, April 14, 2014.

The University of North Carolina Board of Governors, the 34-member body that helps set policy for all UNC system campuses, is not a big fan of using a slice of tuition paid by some students to supplement the tuition of others.

In 2012-13, about $126 million in tuition payments went toward helping pay the tuition of poorer students. The figure represents about 10 percent of tuition payments.

So far, the board has not decided to change the practice.

They do appear poised to beginning requiring campuses to send an accounting of tuition costs to parents and/or students. It would show how much of the tuition payment goes to faculty salaries, how much pays for other costs of running the campus and may identify how much state taxpayers supplement all students attending the schools.

But is that just a first step?

Some of these 34 (no simple 15- or 20-member board will do when it comes to university matters) were quite upset to learn about this tuition money being sliced off to help needy students.

What their outrage ignores is that state taxpayers, rich and poor, have always subsidized university tuition for all students. In return, North Carolina has enjoyed a skilled workforce that attracts business investment, allowing for a modern economy that creates wealth for business owners and wage earners alike.

The complaints also tend to disregard the huge swirl that is university financing, with federal grants, federal tuition aid, various state pools of money, and charitable foundation dollars all feeding into university operations.

Meanwhile, the debate should take into account that the traditional source of need-based financial aid in the state, North Carolina’s unclaimed property fund, is drying up after years of legislators grabbing the principal as well as earned interest.

From 2010 until 2012, legislators plucked between $137 million and $166 million in principal from the unclaimed property fund to pay for need-based tuition. Last year, they could afford to take only $50 million in principal.

The good old days of heavily relying on unclaimed property to pay for the state’s share of need-based scholarships are likely over.

So, unless our public universities are going to become smaller and more elite, someone has to pay for need-based aid.

That’s not to suggest that state leaders should back away from making low tuition a priority, for the same aforementioned reason of creating a skilled, knowledgeable workforce and to provide economic opportunity for all.

And there is nothing wrong with more transparency.

In fact, the Board of Governors ought to be ensuring that the student fees that now total $1,000 or more a year at some schools contain a complete accounting like that which they propose for tuition bills. After all, parents and students should fully understand that they also are subsidizing coaches’ salaries, athletic facility renovations and even golfing green fees.

While they are at it, board members might want to check on whether some of their own golf outings are being subsidized by those fees.

 http://www.reflector.com/opinion/mooneyham/mooneyham-debate-tuition-help-2450627

April 16, 2014 at 9:28 am
TPWohlford says:

Another example of a media person not understanding basic economics.

1. It's called "price discrimination." That's where a monopoly charges each customer whatever they can possibly pay. And that's what the FAFSA does -- determine how much student can possibly beg, borrow and steal. Therefore, this is not a "subsidy".

2. Quite frankly, in many instances the marginal cost of "yet another student" is virtually zero. Unless you have to hire more staff or build another building, it is probably close to zero. I mean, what difference is it if there are 30 versus 31 for Econ 101 class? If you have a dorm room that is vacant, wouldn't *some* money be better than *no money*? (Hint, ask anyone who works at a hotel).

3. The history since the 1950's is clear -- when more aid is offered, the institutions simply jack up the price until "whatever the student can beg borrow and steal" is achieved. So why do we keep upping the ante?

HINT -- you'll find this to be true of Obamacare in the future too -- that insurance premiums will rise as the "subsidy" rises.

4. And this is the kicker -- higher ed for the past 50 years has been a "Veblen Good". If the author had taken Econ 101, he'd remember that term. This is one of those things that is in higher demand the higher the price. Kobe beef, for example, is in high demand simply because it costs a lot. Ditto with some automobile brands. And of course, fine wines. In hundreds of cases over the last 50 years, a college/university finds that its application numbers go UP after a large price increase. And that begs the question -- why should anyone pay for such foolishness?

May 28, 2014 at 10:41 am
Anthony Eller says:

I ask you to please read PR1-614 below. The sad part this just one small part of the out of control $1.2 Trillion student loan debt problem. The $1.2 Trillion student loan debt.. I will tell you again this amount is terrible and it should have never happened, but the far worse problem is that there are no real solutions and this debt continues to grow faster today than ever before.

Please take a look into this corruption. These are the types of problems that arise when student loan consumer protection is taken away from student loans.

A great story would be to see the real reasons that why in 1978 Federal student loan bankruptcy was taken away and then in 2005 Private student loan bankruptcy was taken away.

I believe we should offer a hand up not a hand out. The reinstatement of student loan bankruptcy would keep the schools and lenders and our very own government in check.

The huge profits would stop! The huge increase in tuition would stop! I know when these and all the other corrupted practice are stopped. Then and only then it will be possible for a fair and just system to be put into place.

http://www.studentloanjustice.org/PR1-6-14.html

"A child comes into this world with only hope.... the only gold we will leave this earth with is our word"

Anthony Eller