Across the country, the pressure on public colleges and university systems is reaching the breaking point. Collapsing state budgets and the erosion of financial aid support during the Bush years has low-income and working families facing cost barriers that are threatening access to college. In Georgia, California and Arizona the 30-percent-plus tuition increase proposals have highlighted the growing divide in higher education just as a college education is crucial to career success.

Just two years ago, with much fanfare, the governor’s Commission on Higher Education declared that SUNY and CUNY had been the victims of massive under-investment for two decades and that the priority for rebuilding both systems depended on increasing the fulltime faculty by 2,000 professors. The report also revived a series of proposals that had gained currency during the Pataki Administration, which focused on areas of privatizing the operations of the SUNY system.

Today, New York State is facing the same daunting budget crunch confronting most states. As families face the same financial pressure, our public colleges and universities have experienced dramatic jumps in enrollment. In the past year and a half, the state budget for both CUNY and SUNY has been repeatedly cut. Despite tuition increases, more cuts are being proposed. In addition, Gov. Paterson has put forth a group of initiatives referred to as the Empowerment and Innovation Act. The best aspect of the plan is the marketing name it has been given.

Under the guise of providing CUNY and SUNY with the freedom to stabilize their revenues, the proposal would allow annual tuition increases tied to the Higher Education Price Index, which rises much more dramatically than the Consumer Price Index. In the coming year, the proposed formula would allow for an almost 10-percent increase in tuition. Contrasted with the experience of the CUNY system during the Great Depression, when free tuition was maintained and new colleges were added, we are seeing loss of faculty and dramatic reduction in class sections and even the elimination of entire courses of study.

Allied with this initiative is a proposal to permit different campuses and different programs to charge different tuition. Aside from making it difficult for students to comparison-shop for the best value, more importantly, it may act as a disincentive for a student to choose the most expensive campus, even when a particular campus has the widest range of course offerings and the best possibility for reaching his or her potential. We do a disservice to students and society if we don’t create an educational environment in which exploration of new areas of knowledge is not just possible but encouraged. Putting financial barriers in place at the start of that journey is shortsighted and counterproductive.

All of this is on a backdrop of great enthusiasm for concentrating on math and science, because new emerging technologies demand new skills and knowledge. However, it shouldn’t banish our traditional commitment to a broad liberal arts education, which is still the underpinning of executive creativity. Being able to think critically, analyze and problem-solve will always be essential to human progress. We mustn’t limit students either by cost or a misguided emphasis on education simply as training. We can’t afford not to keep public higher education affordable and multifaceted.


--
Deborah Glick, a Democrat representing parts of Manhattan, is the chair of the Assembly Higher Education Committee.