Members of a six-member conference are seeking a compromise on the controversial addition of a tuition cap.
The House bill, sponsored by Rep. Craig Ford, D-Etowah, included a clause that would cap tuition at a 2.5 percent increase for PACT students. The Senate bill, sponsored by Sen. Ted Little, did not include the tuition cap.
Both bills would provide $256 million over the next eight years to save the program.
“We’ve got to come out with a compromise or nothing at all,” Ford said. “I think we can get around it without a cap, but I think the most important thing is that we can’t let 45,000 children down in the state of Alabama.”
Universities have protested the tuition cap, which was written into the House bill by members of the Alabama Education Association, said Rep. Mike Hubbard.
Hubbard said AEA also included an unseverability clause.
“A severability clause says if one part of the bill is found to be unconstitutional, the rest of the bill survives,” Hubbard said. “An unseverability clause says just the opposite—if anything is found to be unconstitutional, it kills the entire bill, and I firmly believe that AEA did that on purpose.”
Hubbard said he thinks AEA knows the tuition cap is unconstitutional, and they used the unseverability clause to make it look like they were trying to save PACT, when in reality, they are not concerned with the needs of higher education.
“By putting caps on our education, it’s basically shifting the vast majority of the burden of the cost onto higher education,” Hubbard said.
“Auburn University has seen its state appropriation cut by almost $100 million per year, which is close to one third of what we receive from the state,” said President Jay Gogue. “Tuition caps in the PACT bill would mean about $480 million in lost revenue for Auburn, and that would put more downward pressure on our ability to control costs for all students while maintaining strong academic programs.”
Gogue said tuition caps in the bill would also create two classes of students, and the University is concerned with maintaining fairness and equality.
Hubbard said making two classes of students is unconstitutional.
“You would have one class of students who are PACT holders paying less tuition than people who don’t have PACT, which I believe is unconstitutional,” Hubbard said. “I don’t believe the Legislature has the authority to tell the universities what they can and can’t do with their tuition.”
Hubbard said if the version of the bill with tuition caps passed, there would immediately be lawsuits filed by non-PACT students, which would further drain the funds needed to save PACT.
Ford said the burden of tuition caps would not fall on non-PACT users.
“I think the universities are trying to scare the students that don’t have a PACT contract saying that they’re going to raise their tuition to offset it, but they can’t do that—that’s discrimination also,” Ford said. “There’s some additional monies we can find, but also you can’t just have a bottomless pit and give Auburn and Alabama and the rest of the universities in the state the ability to just raise tuition at will.”
Ford said he wants to see a bill passed that will save PACT.
“I don’t care about the cap,” Ford said. “I care about solving PACT for 45,000 children in Alabama.”
Hubbard said he is not trying to kill the bill.
“I believe that from a moral, if not a legal standpoint, we as the state of Alabama have an obligation to these contract holders,” Hubbard said. “I’m trying to save the bill, but I tried to take the caps on tuition off because it is clearly not fair.”
Michael Reynolds, executive director of Auburn student financial services, said keeping tuition equal for all in-state students is extremely important to guarantee fairness and quality of education.
“We certainly want PACT to be saved,” Reynolds said. “The argument is, do you save it by burdening others? It’s almost like pushing the problem that happened with PACT onto the backs of the other students.”
It's interesting to me how worried Jay Gogue is about being "fair" to all AU students but he has NO PROBLEM with the 50-mile radius giving out of state students in-state tuition - resulting in over $20 million in lost revenue each year and this has been in going on for years!!! Talk about discrimination - he and Hubbard need to look at that one.
Another thing that bothers me is that when I have visited the various campuses, I see lots of new buildings under construction, bus services, etc. I know that much of the capital money for construction is coming from federal earmarks and rich contributors but I would imagine that some comes from tuition money and once these buildings are built, they have to be air conditioned, heated, maintenanced (inside and out), insured, etc. throughout the year even when it is likely used only a few hours a day. I would also have to assume that that money comes from tuition dollars or at least part of it does for these operating expenses. My point is that currently tuition is controlled by the universities and they are increasing their costs each year and passing it on to students (and their parents) through increased tuition (or mandatory fees) to a point that either a student has to have rich parents or parents who take out second mortgages and work second jobs or the students have to bear the burden of these student loans for many years and cannot enjoy the fruits of a college education because of their debt load. In this economy, everyone even universities should be cutting back so that they can give students an affordable (and quality) education. Unfortunately, the empire gets bigger without any say by anyone and that is how the major universities want it. Of the student loan that a graduating student carries, what portion was really necessary for a quality education and what portion is part is something unnecessary? I believe in free enterprise and if a person wants to sell a quality product to the public for the highest price that customers will pay, that is fine, if the price gets too high, then people will stop and he will have to evaluate his price vs. profits. This doesn’t happen here, if you can’t afford UA or AU, you can’t afford out of state tuition somewhere else, and unless I am mistaken, despite the quality of other universities across the state, the earning potential of graduating from the majors is higher. But I also believe that as an extension of the state government that gets tax dollars and is supposed to serve the people of Alabama, some limit needs to be put all tuition so that the child of a taxpayer can go get a quality education at a reasonable cost at any university in the state as long as they meet the admission requirements.
The universities have been beneficiaries of the PACT program for 20 years and the PACT program has paid the ever increasing tuition without question for 20 years and now the universities don’t want to help, they simply want to continue getting a blank check
Last, I have gone to these PACT rallies and I have seen the numerous parents and grandparents that made huge sacrifices so that they could buy into a program that was sold by the state as guaranteed or at least implied as guaranteed in later years (or not really told different). Especially with those that have kids/grandkids in or near college and there is no time to go to an alternate plan. It is wrong and simply dishonorable for these major universities to have benefited off the backs of these people and not give them some aid when they need it. And it is also wrong and dishonorable for the State of Alabama to not honor all these contracts they sold whether they are guaranteed or not. These people thought that not only were they buying something of great value for their children/grandchildren, they were also investing in the future of the state so that it could prosper too. I pray that the universities come to the table and show the honor I think that they have as Alabamians but that has been missing so far in this matter.