The University of Texas-Austin has announced that it is offering full tuition scholarships to in-state undergraduates whose families make $65,000 or less each year. The school’s Board of Regents established an endowment that includes money coming from Texas’s oil and gas royalties from state-owned land. The program also expands aid to middle class students whose families earn up to $125,000 per year. This financial aid is aimed to help students from lower income families who are unable to afford to go to such institutions without entering massive amounts of debt. The school’s decision to cap the full tuition scholarship to families who make $65,000 was based on the median household income in Texas, which is $59,206. Other schools in the states of Texas, Michigan, Louisiana, and New York have launched similar successful programs. However, some states such as Oregon have attempted to provide the same kind of support for students, but have lacked the proper funding.
College tuition is one of the exceptions to the privileges and immunities provision of the Constitution, meaning that colleges do not have to charge the same tuition for in-state and out-of-state students. College tuition and funding varies greatly from state to state due to our country’s federal system, which allows for diversity among our states.
- In what ways would college tuition be different for in and out-of-state students if the US had a unitary government instead of a federal system?
- How does the difference in the success of states like Texas versus states like Oregon in establishing programs for full-tuition scholarships highlight the pros and cons of the United States’ federal system?
- What does the graphic show about the importance of a college education in terms of escaping poverty? How could the different state scholarship offerings impact poverty levels in those states.-Livvy Platerink
1. If the United States were to have a unitary government instead of a federal, we would most likely see no difference in cost of tuition for out of state students. As a unitary system consists of mainly federal control, the states would not be able to monitor how much tuition is. In addition, we could see free education, as many unitary systems, specifically in the socialist countries of Europe offer their students free education at the price of higher federal tax.
ReplyDelete2. Texas and other states that have the ability to offer large scholarships to lower income students, often receive their funding form something outside of the governmental realm, specifically a business entity. Texas is able to implement a tax system on oil companies, and in return can benefit their citizens in giving them a cheaper/ free schooling. Oregon doesn't have any large commercial entities that are taxable, and they also do not have much industry. The only possible option I see for states like Oregon is legalizing marijuana and then implementing heavy taxes on it, and returning the tax money to funding programs such as this.
Steven Yarmolinsky
ReplyDelete1. If the United States government ran on a unitary system, there would be little to no difference in tuition between in-state and out-of-state graduates. States have few powers within a unitary government, which would prompt the federal government to make decisions regarding college tuition. As of now, in the federal system, in order for public schools in Texas to receive state funding, they have to accept a certain amount of students in-state, and by offering full tuition scholarships, the school is making themselves more accessible to low-income families.
3. The graphic shows that the higher one's educational level, the less like they are to be in poverty. Moreover, people who have a bachelor's degree are the least likely to be in poverty. Therefore, access to higher and better education plays an important role in breaking the cycle of poverty. If universities receive more state funding, they will be more likely to offer tuition scholarships to low-income families, making higher ed more accessible.
ReplyDelete1. If the US was run by a unitary government, the Privileges and Immunities Clause would not even be necessary because everything would be controlled by the central power. This would make it so that tuition would be the same for in-state and out-of-state students.
ReplyDelete2. The contrast in the successfulness of different states in enacting programs like these highlights how certain states can turn out to be more successful than others in terms of wealth. For example, Texas had ample funding for the program, but Oregon did not, showing the disparity in available funding between the states. The difference also highlights the ability of states to place themselves in advantageous situations, which in this case was clear through the greater amount of spending money that Texas had when compared to Oregon.
3. The graphic shows the link between education and poverty. In general, those who have received a higher level of education are less likely to live in poverty after school. If more people can afford to go to college because of scholarships, poverty levels will likely drop due to the strong correlation between a college degree and not living in poverty.
3. The graphic shows that the more educated you are the lesser your chances are of living in poverty. If schools over more scholarships for lower income students they can help impoverished students not have student loans, and later down the line not be in poverty. States that offer more financial aid and scholarships as a result will probably have lower rates of poverty.
ReplyDeleteEthan Gardner
ReplyDelete3. The graphic shows that someone is much less likely to face poverty if they are more educated. It points to the undeniable fact that education helps people find better jobs and get a better life, and shows that what UT Austin is doing is very beneficial to lower income students. States such as Texas who offer these scholarships will probably see a decrease in poverty rates over time, as they help create a more educated public.
3) The graphic shows an inverse relationship between the higher level of education and the poverty rate. As people achieve higher levels of education they are less likely to fall into poverty with a percentage of 4.8%, unlike those who have not earned a high school who experience a poverty rate of 24.5%. If more states offer similar financial aid policies as the policy implemented by UT Austin it will ultimately help those who are in poverty. Many people after graduating college will have to pay college debt but with this new policy it allows those who are in poverty to avoid debt and jumpstart their careers.
ReplyDeleteCollege tuition would be different if there was a unitary government because states would not have a state government and push for out of state costs. State governments want to encourage people to stay within the state they go to school at so they will contribute to their economy. In order to drive people to contribute to the state economy, the state provides in state advantages for schooling.
ReplyDelete