TX Budget Approved. UT tutition to go up at least 50%.

Education means f***-all to this President anyway. He went to private schools, on to Yale and Harvard, and still thinks Syria is in Mexico.

 

President Bush engineered the Texas State budget this year? Really???

 

This is happening nationwide. Colleges are doing a horrible job managing their costs.

I read an article about this- may have been Newsweek or Businessweek. Some colleges had auditors come in, and they couldn't figure out where all the money was going!!

 

i betcha all that book-learnin taught him that the President of the United States has ZERO to do with decisions related to tuition at public state schools.

this is classic...i'd like to frame this post to show just how silly the bush haters have become...this is a classic, classic example.

personally, i still blame clinton for the price of hornmelons at Randall's....but that's just me.

 

i betcha all that book-learnin taught him that the President of the United States has ZERO to do with decisions related to tuition at public state schools.

While technically true, Bush did directly impact this year's education budget in Texas by slashing taxes to the point where the government has no funds when the economy goes south. Not surprisingly, he's doing the same thing at the federal level.

Great for winning elections - disastrous in terms of long-term consequences.

 

Major,

Our entire government cuold use a little belt tightening.

Raising tuition is not that big of a deal, it is the smallest cost associated with attending college, and is only charged once a semester.

There are plenty of programs for less priviledged to go to school free. If UT needs to raise tuition, so be it.

DD

 

i'm not buying it, major....

1. that's not at all what was intended in that post...

2. tuitions have gone up at inflated rates for YEARS!!! that's the very basis of the Texas Tomorrow Fund program...tuition grows faster than inflation....and that pre-dates this president..or the last president...or the last president. his father raised taxes...his predecessor raised taxes...tuition still went up. weak relationship, at best.

 

2. tuitions have gone up at inflated rates for YEARS!!! that's the very basis of the Texas Tomorrow Fund program...tuition grows faster than inflation....and that pre-dates this president..or the last president...or the last president. his father raised taxes...his predecessor raised taxes...tuition still went up. weak relationship, at best.

Tuition rates have been regulated by the state for, I assume, all of its history. This is the first budget that deregulated tuition because there was simply no way in hell that the state could afford the costs otherwise - it's basically telling universities that they'll have to fend for themselves. For each of the past 2 years, I believe tuition rates have gone up about $6-$8 per credit hour per year. Over the next two (if glynch's numbers are true), they will go up $25 per hour per year.

I believe the UT System told professors and admins at UT to expect to have to slash about 5-10% of their budgets this coming year. This is no ordinary run-of-the-mill tuition hike. This is basically a necessity to save the school system because of a massive lack of funds at the state level. That is a direct result of the budget mess created over the last several years or so, based on Bush's "if we have extra money, we should lower taxes" philosophy that ignores having to deal with bad times.

It may not have been the intent of the article or of the original poster(s), but Bush's state tax cuts had a *very direct* impact on this tuition deregulation.

 

Setting aside UT, which will likely see SMU-size tuition within five to ten years, one of the things supports have said is that, under deregulation, some universities will lower their tuition in order to attract more students.

I will actually be surprised to see it happen, though. We'll see once Spring tuition rates are set, but I'd be willing to wager that not a single 4 year public institution in the state will lower tuition for the Spring.

While I'm sure UT will not see a drop in enrollment no matter what they charge in tuition, what happens at schools like West Texas A&M? If they raise tuition, they're likely going to see a drop in enrollment, potentially ending up with fewer dollars than before the hike.

And significantly adding to the costs of education is likely going to end up increasing the student loan default rate, potentially putting some Texas schools in danger of having their students lose the ability to receive federal education funds. And at that point, you might as well shut the doors.

 

yep...it's bush's fault.

 

I do wonder why we bother voting in a legislature when our governors are so powerful.

 

So how do you explain budget problems in almost EVERY other university or college???

 

I do wonder why we bother voting in a legislature when our governors are so powerful.

The governor set the agenda focus squarely on tax cuts. Do you not think he was a major part of the reason they were enacted?

So how do you explain budget problems in almost EVERY other university or college???

Budget cuts across all states. From what I understand, few states have nearly the same level of problem as Texas. Texas would have had problems regardless - they are just far more severe than they would have been otherwise.

Do you NOT believe that the tax cuts resulted in lower revenues for Texas this year? Do you NOT believe that lower revenues has led to budget issues? Do you NOT believe that budget issues have led to tuition deregulation and thus the tuition spike? I don't see why this is a complicated issue.

 

I thought public education at the UT and A&M systems was subsidized from that big oil/investments fund, PUF or some acronym. What happened?

 

I thought public education at the UT and A&M systems was subsidized from that big oil/investments fund, PUF or some acronym. What happened?

It is. The endowment is, I believe, the 2nd largest in the country behind Harvard. However, it funds the entire UT and A&M system so it's only a portion of their total funding.

 

You always have HCC

 

I would think that if the Democrats, who then controlled the House, could flee to Oklahoma to prevent redistricting, they could also maybe not follow along with whatever the governor wants if they don't also think such things are a good idea. Certainly past Legislatures have been able to do that.

If they don't think for themselves, then what is the point of having them there? I would not disagree that Mr. Bush played a major role in tax cutting, but I don't see you listing any other contributors to the situation when you posted before. To deny that it takes the Legislature, and at the time Democrats, to tango is to deny the reality of the situation. The tax cuts don't happen without some bipartisan support and without the Legislature.

And I don't know that tax cuts leds to lower revenue for the state this year. For all I know, revenues would be even lower with higher taxes. The state economy has been hard-hit, adding more costs to business might well have made the situation worse, leading to the same or lower revenues. We don't know what the optimal level of taxation in this state is.

 

If they don't think for themselves, then what is the point of having them there? I would not disagree that Mr. Bush played a major role in tax cutting, but I don't see you listing any other contributors to the situation when you posted before. To deny that it takes the Legislature, and at the time Democrats, to tango is to deny the reality of the situation. The tax cuts don't happen without some bipartisan support and without the Legislature.


Of course the legislature plays a role. However, change the legislature to the Republican party and you still have tax cuts. Change the governor and you don't. Who is more responsible? Besides which, I believe a majority of Democrats were against the tax cut anyway - but a few plus the Republicans were enough to pass it. (I may be wrong on this and thinking of another bill)

And I don't know that tax cuts leds to lower revenue for the state this year. For all I know, revenues would be even lower with higher taxes. The state economy has been hard-hit, adding more costs to business might well have made the situation worse, leading to the same or lower revenues. We don't know what the optimal level of taxation in this state is.

We do know that, even if the supply-side concept is true, then at the very least it takes many years to have its positive revenue effect. Second, the Bush tax cuts were not cuts to business - they were property and sales tax cuts. I think you'd be very hard pressed to find anyone with an economic background who actually thought that we made up over $3 billion in revenues this year because of lower taxes.

 

While I certainly do not like the idea of large tuition increases, I have to say that all the b****ing and moaning about it is absurd. When I was at A&M, there was a fella down the hall from LA. We asked him why he chose A&M, thinking that he had family ties or something. He said "You all's out of state tuition is cheaper than our in state tuition."

Bottom line: We have had it as cheap as it comes in Texas for quite some time. In the days of large state schools being forced to gobble up small satellite campuses, it just isn't feasible anymore. This has been coming for YEARS...just a matter of time.

This is preposterous. You know, or at least should, that the governor of Texas has ZERO in the way or real power. Talk about agenda setting all you want, but the other party still controlled the Legislature, and they could have voted against it. To blame it all on Bush is extremely short-sighted.

We are nearing a crisis in regards to the level of ad valorem taxes in Texas. They HAD to stop the tax increases. As a bankruptcy attorney I can tell you that people are LOSING THEIR HOMES due to the property valuation increases from year to year. I would rather have students borrow additional thousands than have lower income and middle class families forced out of their homes because they can no longer afford the taxes. Who's being compassionate now?