Colleges wary of Obama cost-control plan

WASHINGTON - The fiscal alarm bells were most likely reverberating across the lawns, through the halls and into the administrative offices on U.S. college campuses the moment the words crossed President Barack Obama's lips Tuesday evening.

There's a new plan to contain college tuition costs.

Fuzzy math, Illinois State University's president called it. "Political theater of the worst sort," said the University of Washington's head.

But to Dr. Elliott Parker at the University of Nevada, Reno, the requisite details aren't in yet to justify Chicken Little reactions among the leaders and accountants of American Academia.

"There's just too little detail to get worked up about it," said Parker, a professor and chairman of the Department of Economics at UNR who also writes a weekly column for the Nevada Appeal. He said he watched the entire State of the Union speech and is following the tuition subject closely. "I think his (Obama's) heart is in the right place with this, but there aren't enough details to draw conclusions."

Obama's new plan to force colleges and universities to contain tuition or face losing federal dollars is raising alarm among education leaders who worry about the threat of government overreach. Particularly sharp words came from the presidents of public universities; they're already frustrated by increasing state budget cuts.

The reality, said Illinois State's Al Bowman, is that simple changes cannot easily overcome deficits at many public schools. He said he was happy to hear Obama, in a speech Friday at the University of Michigan, urge state-level support of public universities. But, Bowman said, given the decreases in state aid, tying federal support to tuition prices is a product of fuzzy math.

However, even if university leaders' worst fears are realized with the president's plan, Parker still doesn't envision a big problem for Nevada.

"Nevada has little to worry about with this," Parker said. "We don't spend a lot per student as it is."

At Washington University, President Mike Young said Obama showed he did not understand how the budgets of public universities work.

Young said the total cost to educate college students in his state, which is paid for by both tuition and state government dollars, has gone down because of efficiencies on campus. While universities are tightening costs, the state is cutting their subsidies and authorizing tuition increases to make up for the loss.

"They really should know better," Young said. "This really is political theater of the worst sort."

Obama is targeting only a small part of the financial aid picture: the $3 billion known as campus-based aid that flows through college administrators to students. He is proposing to increase that amount to $10 billion and change how it is distributed to reward schools that hold down costs and ensure that more poor students complete their education.

The bulk of the more than $140 billion in federal grants and loans goes directly to students and would not be affected.

The average in-state tuition and fees at four-year public colleges this school year rose 8.3 percent and with room and board now exceed $17,000 a year, according to the College Board.

Nevada's college costs are already well below that average. According to collegecosts.org, a year at UNR costs $4,128, and even Reno's Morrison University, a private college, is $9,775. And Western Nevada College in Carson City is priced at $1,763.

Obama's plan would need approval by Congress, a hard sell in an atmosphere of partisan gridlock.

In his address Tuesday, Obama described meeting with university presidents who explained how some schools curtailed costs through technology and redesigning courses to help students finish more quickly. He said more schools need to take such steps.

Rising tuition costs have been attributed to a variety of factors, among them a decline in state dollars and competition for the best facilities and professors. Critics say some higher education institutions are attempting to wait out the economic downturn and have been too reluctant to make large-scale changes that would cut costs such as offering three-year degree programs.

The federal government's leverage to take on the rising cost of college is limited because higher education is decentralized, with most student aid following the student.

The response to Obama's plan wasn't all negative. Many university presidents said they welcome a conversation about making college more affordable and efficient.

In Missouri, where Gov. Jay Nixon has proposed a 12.5 percent funding cut for higher education in the coming fiscal year, Obama's proposal could put even more pressure on public colleges and universities to limit tuition increases. By state law, schools must limit such increases to the annual inflation rate unless they receive permission for larger ones. Nixon has warned schools that he doesn't want to see a tuition increase of more than 3 percent, the latest Consumer Price Index increase.

"The president's message isn't inconsistent with the agenda that we've been pursuing here in Missouri," said Paul Wagner, deputy commissioner of the state Department of Higher Education. "It's good to see him put the focus on the same things."