|
Vouchers
for Higher Ed
As
an alternative to subsidizing public universities,
Virginia should consider subsidizing student
tuitions.
A
proposal to loosen state government’s control over
certain institutions of higher education in return
for reduced annual appropriations has stirred up a
good deal of controversy.
Critics describe the proposal as radical.
The problem may be that it isn’t radical
enough.
The
prompting for this proposed change in the
relationship between the Commonwealth and its
state-supported colleges and universities is
twofold. As
a share of their total spending, state funding of
Virginia’s
public institutions of higher education has declined
dramatically during the past quarter century.
Meanwhile, bureaucratic control of these
institutions has increased, causing concern among
three of Virginia’s most prestigious public
colleges and universities—the University of
Virginia, Virginia Tech and the College of William
& Mary—that they are doomed to mediocrity
unless the system is changed.
These
three colleges are urging the General Assembly to
give them greater flexibility in developing their
budgets, setting tuition rates, purchasing goods and
equipment, planning and constructing capital
projects, and dealing with personnel matters.
They see the relaxation of regulatory control
as essential to their success in competing with
institutions that are considered their peers.
The
tradeoff of reduced taxpayer support for charter
universities is both a political selling point and,
ironically, grounds for concern among legislators.
The General Assembly has had, and will surely
continue to have, difficulty in coming up with state
funding to meet budget targets for higher education.
Some see the charter university proposal as
relaxation of the Commonwealth’s responsibility to
support Virginia’s public colleges and
universities. They
argue that the General Assembly should do whatever
is necessary to meet the funding demands of Virginia’s
15 four-year institutions and 23 two-year
institutions.
Two
members of the William & Mary faculty, Robert B.
Archibald and David H. Feldman, suggest another
solution. They
note that state appropriations have never provided
the only source of revenue for public colleges.
Taxpayer funding was intended to subsidize
in-state tuition to make college financially
accessible to as many Virginia
students as possible.
Archibald and Feldman propose the termination
of direct state funding of colleges in favor of
direct financing of in-state students.
By
giving the money directly to students rather than to
the colleges, the General Assembly would be inclined
to focus on what it is ultimately subsidizing— not the institutions, but the students.
This also enhances the role of the student as
consumer. Institutions
that compete aggressively should not suffer.
Those that are not competitive will fail to
attract enough students and private contributions to
be successful. Those
colleges can then blame the market, but not the
General Assembly or taxpayers, for any decline in
funding.
We
can learn from lessons abroad that heavy government
subsidies of colleges and universities do not
guarantee excellence.
In fact, that kind of financing scheme has
led to mediocrity due to excessive central control
by governments.
A
shift toward fee-based university financing is
gradually taking hold in Great
Britain,
where extensive government control had contributed
to a leveling among that nation’s universities.
The number of British institutions ranking
among the world’s best has declined sharply.
The same pattern can be seen in other
European countries.
To
date, our elected representatives have all but
ignored the Archibald-Feldman proposal.
It would be a disservice to Virginia
students and taxpayers to debate the future of
higher education without carefully considering the
option of direct student grants.
--
January 4,
2005
|
