Cuts proposed in the House, debate over tuition freeze

The subcommittee on Education of the House Appropriations Committee voted last week to cut the USM Budget another $20.3 million as part of an effort to balance the state budget.  Of the $20.3 million, $10 million will come from the base operating budget (meaning a carry-over cut in years out) and $10.3 from the fund balance, meaning a one-time cut from the USM's savings that are used to sure up bonds for buildings.

The Governor proposed in his budget this year to increase funding for higher education by $27 million, $16.9 million dedicated to supporting a fourth straight tuition freeze for undergraduate students.  The increases, together, would both maintain quality and increase affordability by holding down the cost of tuition for students. 

Yet, after cutting $20.1 million from the budget, House officials still feel that the USM should hold the line on tuition.  Subcommittee Chair Delegate John Bohanan said, 

I would hope and doubt that the impact would result in a tuition hike for students...In the end, higher education is going to fare extremely well.

In the Governor's original budget, the tuition freeze support funding is listed as a separate line-item.  Delegates left this language in, assuming that the designation would ensure that the money would actually be used to hold tuition.

USM Chancellor Brit Kirwan expressed that this was not the case, and that with general fund dollars cut, that the tuition freeze dollars would then simply fill the whole of depleted funds.  The Board of generally only supported "funded" tuition freezes, of which the house proposal would not be.

I personally am opposed to the concept of an "unfunded" tuition freeze, as is the case in the House version of the budget.  Fortunately, the Board of Regents sets tuition policies, partially removing the decision from political pressures.  Chancellor Kirwan has highlighted that higher education in Maryland appreciates all the support and recognizes the need to cut the budget during the tough ficsal times--but not at the cost of major deficiences in quality.  

While the House version is far from the final proposal, the move to institute an "unfunded" tuition freeze from legislators is concerning.  With strapped universities, quality erodes.  Class sizes grow, faculty are overloaded, library resources remain stagnant, campus hours shorten, other fees arise, among other indicators.  A moderate tuition increase is an appropriate compromise if the state cannot fund the USM budget to the appropriate level.

But, in the meantime, the Senate is still in the process of developing its budget proposal.  Traditionally, the Senate is a bit more liberal in supporting higher education.  I have met with both the Chair of Budget and Taxation, Senator Currie, and the Chair of the Education subcommittee, Senate Kasemeyer, who both said to me that they plan to provide full funding for a tuition freeze.  So, we continue to share our concerns and thoughts with members in the Senate.  Once the Senate has a budget proposal, the House and Senate will meet in conference committee to work out details.

Check out articles highlighting developments:

- in The Sun

- in The Diamondback

- in The Chronicle of Higher Education