John Laureano
EH 102
7, December 2013

Rising Tuition Cost Solutions

Rising tuition cost has been an issue that Americans have been dealing with for several years. Each year the cost of attending universities increases while the tax payer support decreases (Fethke 2012). The government has attempted to solve the problem by increasing federal spending on Pell grant programs and other educational loans with low interest rates (William 2013). But such programs have instead driven the cost of tuition upward since universities have to spend a great amount of money on student programs, operational expenses, and facilities upgrades to stay competitive with other universities (Clark 2011). There needs to be a solution that will help drive the cost of tuition down, but that solution will have to come from the government and has to include tax payer support. Because providing subsidies for schools that do not control their expenses and keep increasing their tuition cost does not make sense (Fethke 2012).
A possible solution is for the government to pass a new law that would reduce the subsidies for universities that keep increasing the tuition cost for students, such a move would motivate universities to take a hard look at their expenses. As part of the new law the government should award higher subsidies for universities that keep their tuition cost down and affordable for students. The law would help student keep their loans at an acceptable amount, we do not need our children graduating with a huge debt that would cause them to default their loans; our children are the future for tomorrow. The law should also have requirements such as requiring universities to keep a certain graduation rate or their subsidies benefits would be impacted. The law should also include a year-end bonus for universities that kept the tuition cost down and include a penalty for those that increased tuition cost for unnecessary expenses or unacceptable reasons. The unnecessary expenses could include for example upgrades to sports fields, such upgrades should be inspected carefully and should only be done if its absolutely necessary meaning if the sports field is unsafe or in conditions that is not presentable for the students. Unnecessary expenses could include advertising campaigns, basically the law would award benefits for universities that have a good performance while keeping the cost affordable and it would penalize those with poor performance with unreasonable expenses. The law should also include a measure that would also discourage students from attending for profit universities because the cost for such school is much higher than a state university. The government should instead provide less aid for students who attend private universities and provide more for those that attend public universities. It will help to reduce the cost of tuition for public universities since they do not have to make expenses to try to stay competitive. We have more for profit schools than we do public, so public universities have many competitors. It is reasonable solution with consequences such as for profit universities filing law suit for reduced aid for their students, or universities ignoring the law altogether and simply run business as normal while increasing tuition cost mainly because most students view college as an investment instead of a debt.
The other solution for reducing tuition cost would be for states to provide more funding for public universities, one of the reasons state universities have to increase their tuition cost is due to lack of state funding because of poor tax payer support (Fethke 2012). If the tax payer supports education the state can provide more funding for public universities, but the money has to come from somewhere and there needs to be rules in place that will encourage universities to control their expenses. The money can be obtained by increasing taxes in certain areas such as tobacco, alcohol, and property taxes but the tax payer needs to be educated by the state. The states needs to make the tax payer aware why the tax increase is needed. But such tax increase carries a risk of upsetting the tax payer. The tax payer could simply quit using those taxable products and completely switch to something else which would impact the state funding for universities. But the chances of that happening is unlikely because those who consumes those products is because they like it, but the consumer would more likely decrease the product consumption. Which would lead to a profit reduction for companies that produce those products. The tax measure needs to also include a requirement that will force the universities to control their expenses. If the school tuition cost keeps increasing without a valid reason the state should have the ability to penalize the school, the penalty can include reducing the state funding or a penalty fee.

Universities that have perform research have a high possibility of increasing tuition cost to help fund the research, since the people that are performing the research have to be paid. There is also the need for resources to carry out the research. As such the state should implement a sponsor program that includes tax benefits for the sponsors. The sponsor program should provide tax benefits such as tax credit to reduce the amount of money owed to the state based on the amount of their contribution towards the school research program. But there needs to be a limit towards the tax credit, since we do not want the sponsor to have a complete tax free ride. But we also have to keep a balance that is fair for the sponsor and state. The program could also include discounted rates on taxes for sponsors such as reducing the amount of state taxes that has to be paid every time the sponsor has to pay their employees. Such programs could encourage many local companies to contribute funding towards research, which ultimate will benefit us in the future. The sponsoring program also has the benefit of helping to increase the amount of research that schools could perform. But the programs should be limited to only be towards the fields of Medical and Science, so that it can become beneficial for tomorrow.
For any of the proposed solutions to succeed both of them will require the tax payer support, since they are the ones that vote in Election Day and the government has to make decision that is in the best interest for the tax payer. Implementing a measure to control subsidies can be beneficial but it does not guarantee to reduce tuition cost, while the sponsoring programs can also help reduce tuition cost it would only apply for school that perform research which would leave out public universities that are non-research. A tax solution can be beneficial but it carries a greater risk of upsetting tax payer that consume the tobacco and alcohol products. It also has a risk of reducing the consumption of those products. It is up to the tax payer to decide which solution would be best for their best interest each one of the solutions has their own risks. But essentially each solutions is gearing towards reducing tuition cost and controlling universities expenses.

Work Cited Page

Clark, Kim, and PENELOPE WANG. "Stop The Tuition Madness." Money 40.8 (2011):
114-122. Academic Search Premier. Web. 7 Dec. 2013.

Fethke, Gary. "Why Does Tuition Go Up? Because Taxpayer Support Goes Down." Chronicle Of Higher Education 58.31 (2012): A28. Academic Search Premier. Web. 7 Dec. 2013. HOAR, WILLIAM P. "Obamacollege Is Standing At The Door." New American (08856540) 29.19 (2013): 41-43. Academic Search Premier. Web. 7 Dec. 2013.