• Registered: 03-28-2009
  • Posts: 31

Topic: Tuition Increases: Issue For ALL Students

I'm really offended that univeresities have pitted PACT students against non-PACT students . . . and suggested that non-PACT students will have to pay the tuition for PACT students if the tuition cap is approved.  I am not asking non-PACT students to do anything for my PACT contract holder . . . but I am telling the State to honor its contract.  I do understand politics, but this tactic is unconscionable . . . and now I am mad!  I expect what I paid for, and I do NOT expect other students to make that payment.  I also resent the implication that PACT students want non-PACT students to pay for their education.  That is a lie.

As a result, I'm taking a bit different approach in my communication with legislators (and universities). The impact of the tuition cap discussion should not be making the 90% of non-PACT students pay the tuition gap for the 10% of PACT students - rather, the real issue is the what is happening with tuition increases for ALL students (PACT and non-PACT).

I think all public universities should limit tuition increases for ALL students to 2 1/2% at least until 2016 when the economy is predicted to get better, or at least tie increases to the cost of living.   I know universities have taken a hit in legislative funding, but Alabama families also have taken a hard hit.  Has your salary increased an average of 7.7% for the last nine years?  Will your salary increase 13-14% for each of the next two years (Auburn's announced tuition increases)?

The unemployment rate in February was over 11% statewide, with 22 counties showing an unemployment rate of 15% or more.   Alabama families are hurting.

At the least, universities should be required to post a tuition increase plan for a five-year schedule - no more announcing tuition increases in March to May or even August that go into effect that same Fall.  In my opinion, universities also should give specific plans for what they will do with the increase and provide an opportunity for parents, students, legislators, and alumni to offer input.   If the increase will support increases for faculty salaries, I might be in favor of it.  If it is to support to construction of new facilities, maybe not . . . at least, not in this economy.

The question is NOT whether it is fair for non-PACT students to pay the tuition gap for PACT students.  The question is what tuition level is fair for ALL students.  Alabamians are hurting . . . universities should be part of the solution.

I

Last edited by kittycollier (04-15-2010 2:45:20 pm)

  • Registered: 08-10-2009
  • Posts: 71

Re: Tuition Increases: Issue For ALL Students

Good thoughts kitty!

I'll suggest even a different slant. Most of our colleges and Universities have excess capacity for more students, and with the exception of some popular required courses, many classes are never full. The real incremental cost of having a PACT student attend a class is often ZERO. (Just a butt filling an otherwise empty desk.) On the other hand, not having that kid in class costs real tuition dollars, whether capped or uncapped. The truth of the matter is that by fighting a cap the Leaders of Secondary Education are probably cutting off their noses and ears to spite their faces. By quarreling over whether or not tuition could increase by 2.5% or some bigger number, they're bringing into play the possibility of losing 100%. Some kids just won't be able to attend at all if PACT is allowed to implode. It's naive to assume that everyone will simply pay their own way.

  • Registered: 04-15-2010
  • Posts: 4

Re: Tuition Increases: Issue For ALL Students

Someone needs to look into whether or not the PACT program contracts could actually be considered a Security. It appears to me that the Pact contract that parents received could possibly be considered an "investment contract" as defined by the Alabama Securities Act. Just curious, has anyone thought of approaching the Director of the Securities Commission, as to whether or not the misrepresentations made during the sale of the investment contracts is a violation of the Securities Act and therefore a felony?
If it isn't why?
What determines whether or not it is or isn't a security?

  • Registered: 03-28-2009
  • Posts: 31

Re: Tuition Increases: Issue For ALL Students

KBinHoover:

The sad part is that AU and UA don't care if they don't get PACT students.  For the most part, they have waiting lists of students who want to attend their institutions, and if they don't fill the seats with an in-state student, they'll be happy to fill the seat with an out-of-state student who pays more tuition (at least the ones who don't live within 50 miles of the school and actually pay out of state tuition). 

My Opinion For What It's Worth:  It's no secret that universities (and all higher education) have strong ties to legislators and are very effective in the political process.  Many legislators are current or former members of Boards of Trustees - and probably get great football tickets; some legislators actually work for a university or two-year college (John Rogers at UAB, for example); there have been several two-year college presidents who served in the legislature at the same time they were college presidents; universities and two-year colleges also employ some legislative spouses/children, etc.;  universities and two-year colleges also do significant business with legislator's firms/companies, etc.  If someone had the time to track PAC to PAC donations, I think we would also find that some universities make very large donations to political campaigns.  Every university and two-year college is located in somebody's legislative district, and it is a rare legislator who does not feel responsible/obligated to any university or two-year college in his or her district.  University lobbyists are paid to stay in constant communication with legislators, and they do a good job.    Universities and two-year colleges in most states are major players in the political process, and Alabama is no exception. 

Do I think the situation is hopeless?  Definitely not . . . but I do not think the legislature will solve it on their own.  We have a history in Alabama of letting federal and state courts solve our public policy issues, and I think the PACT contracts will be no different.  It will cost the State more money in the long run, but that's how we solve problems in Alabama in far too many cases.

Last edited by kittycollier (04-15-2010 10:13:45 pm)