Dr. Calvin is Henry Clay Hall Professor at the University of San Francisco and President of Pacific Graduate School of Psychology.
Each time the governor or Legislature here in California proposes an increase
in tuition there is a huge hue and cry that such increases are unfair and
will limit access. In particular, objections are raised on the grounds that
such increases in tuition will be especially onerous for needy students
and students of color.
As we all know, competition is fierce for the limited amount of resources
available to state legislatures. Crime prevention and K-12 education are
among the highest priorities in most state legislatures, with requests for
funds for higher education having to compete with those priorities and a
number of other important items.
The impact of the failure of the Legislature to appropriate adequate funds has now reached a crisis state which has led the California Higher Education Policy Center to issue a report in which Dr. David Breneman asked that the governor declare a state of emergency. What has brought this sorry state of affairs to pass has been the failure to means test tuition. Means testing would require those students who can pay the full cost of their university/college education to do so; only those who need support from the state would be subsidized.
In 1991-92, which is the last year for which definitive figures are available from the California Student Aid Commission, the average parental income of dependent full-time undergraduates in the University of California system was $68,000; in the California State University system it was $53,000; and in the Community College system it was $47,000.
Does it seem fair that a student who comes from a family whose annual income is, say, $75,000, $100,000 or even $1 million, should have a large portion of the cost of attending a public university or college paid for by taxpayers who have incomes that are much lower and who, in fact, are often struggling to get by? Clearly such a policy of low subsidized tuition for all the citizens of a state, regardless of their income, makes neither economic nor moral sense. This failure to means test tuition is the single largest factor driving the economic crisis in America's public universities and colleges. If this policy is not changed and changed forthwith, access really will have to be limited in the ways suggested by the report of the California Higher Education Policy Center.
Let us think for a moment what would happen if we followed such a policy in other areas of our life. Food is certainly a necessity. Suppose instead of giving food stamps to people in need, we lower the price of food for everyone and then make up the difference out of general tax funds. The absurdity of such a system is self evident. To take another example, certainly housing is essential. Suppose that we build public housing units and allow people to live in them regardless of how much they earn. We would then be using general funds taken from the taxpayers to subsidize the housing costs of wealthy individuals. Again, such a policy would be laughable. However, for some reason the identical policy operates in higher education and has been strongly supported by the very people to whom it does the most harm.
The result of this non-means-tested low-tuition policy has been disastrous for students, faculty and the community at large. We need to demand that those who can afford to pay for their own university or college education should do so in order that society will have the funds available to assist those who truly need support.