Editorial: Chancellor King and Stony Brook Albany Day

It was merely two days ago that the Independent published an editorial summarily criticizing Governor Pataki’s 2005-2006 Executive Budget. We found the budget to be woefully remiss in recommending the elimination of funding for the Education Opportunity Program; in effectively cutting the Tuition Assistance Program by forcing students to borrow against it; and implementing a system of annual tuition increases that would every year substantially raise the cost of a college degree for younger generations. The full text of the education portion of the budget can be found here: http://publications.budget.state.ny.us/fy0506app1/elfa.pdf.

That editorial concluded on the promising note of 700 Stony Brook students converging on the capitol for Stony Brook Albany Day on March 1st. Keep that image at the forefront of your mind because, according to SUNY Chancellor Robert L. King at yesterday’s kickoff luncheon for Albany Day, all 700 of us should be going to tell the legislature to vote for the Governor’s Executive Budget.

We at the Independent were taken aback by the nature of the Chancellor’s request. Surely, making such a partisan pitch might have been expected if we were lobbyists for the Governor’s Executive Budget. However, that’s simply not the case. We are students first, whom according to Chancellor King, should be going to Albany to lobby for a simultaneous increase in our tuition and cut in our financial aid. (Not to mention the irony of EOP students in the audience being told by the Chancellor of the SUNY system to lobby for the elimination of over 10.5 million dollars of their funding.)

In the Chancellor’s half-hour presentation there was no mention of these sweeping changes to a students’ ability to afford and work towards a college degree. Rather, we received a well-polished sales pitch for one aspect of the Governor’s proposal, the “Tuition Guarantee.”

In all fairness to the Chancellor, his presentation on this program was articulate and thorough. He left us skeptical but persuaded nonetheless. The plan would guarantee the same tuition rate for all 4 years a student attends a SUNY institution. A tuition freeze would give both students and university administrators the financial security they now lack under the current system of yearly increases and cuts. Yet, there’s a loophole that says if state funding is cut to a level that can’t cover collectively bargained wage agreements, the students will again pick up the cost, and the tuition freeze would be broken.

This is where skepticism is needed most. At a time when the state has been less and less willing to commit public money to higher education it is alarming to see a plan that places SUNY’s future entirely at the fate of tuition increases. Tuition would be raised annually for each class of incoming freshmen according to the Higher Education Price Index. While the Chancellor may be right to point out that SUNY tuition is disproportionately lower than that of public universities in other states, this fact does not justify creating a system of disproportionate tuition increase.

We’re open to the fact that the SUNY system needs more resources and it can’t all come from the government. Tuition increases are as inevitable as inflation. Yet, we do not see why with the added revenue coming from tuition hikes the Governor seeks to eliminate over 50% of the funding for the EOP program and effectively cuts in half the amount money a student can receive under the Tuition Assistance Program. (Half of the financial award must be borrowed with loans that pay interest and this money is only reimbursed if a student’s degree is completed in exactly 4 years.) That seems to us like a double tax for SUNY and CUNY students from the lower and working class economic brackets, especially those of whom may work full-time or part-time and take more than 4 years to graduate. More money should mean more financial aid, not the other way around.

Though we remain open to the good intentions of the “Tuition Guarantee” plan, it is misleading if not down right duplicitous to tell students to lobby for the Governor’s entire proposal, when in reality that proposal threatens their very academic livelihood. The details count. The Chancellor omitted some very significant ones. Students should hold him responsible for that.

In conclusion, we here at the Independent have decided it’s obviously not enough to have 700 students converge on Albany. We may need 700 more and everyone one of you to be independent-minded enough to stand up against the Governor’s proposal in the office of a State Senator or Assemblyman. In the same sentence students need to be reasonable enough to recognize the good intentions behind the “Tuition Guarantee” yet strong enough to let them know levying a tax on the economic opportunity of future generations is not an option.

After reading this editorial you should understand that you have the power. Otherwise, the most powerful person in the SUNY system would not have come here to ask you to lobby on his and the Governor’s behalf. Nearly 2,700 of you voted last Election Day, more than any other college campus in all of New York State. Go to Albany March 1st and speak your mind.

Links:
Newsday Article Another Article