<p>Also, the “real” purpose of IS vs OOS and the “perceived” purpose, of course are two different things.</p>
<p>I agree, on the surface, it seems to be “fair” and “logical.” And it bolsters the idea among state residents (and lawmakers) that this is **ours<a href=“our%20universities”>/b</a> and that is **yours<a href=“other%20state%20universities”>/b</a>.</p>
<p>But those sentiments should be outgrown by … maybe second grade?
We’re all presumably adults.</p>
<p>Some people seem to have completely lost the point of my little response a few days ago.</p>
<p>Historical reasons for something should never be the excuse for continuing something.
Otherwise, we’d still be hunting bison and cooking food over an open fire. I was putting forth my opinion. One can agree or disagree. That’s fine. But in order to have an opinion, one should keep an open mind and actually look at and analyze things instead of having knee-jerk reactions … “Well, 200 years ago, states were set up to … blah.” That’s just garbage.</p>
<p>I promise I have an open mind on this GolfFather. How would we change the system when different states allocate funds at such a different rate? Va is really not good at supporting higher ed, but North Carolina and I believe Michigan do much better. Would the schools essentially be private with no state support, allowing those funds to go back to K-12? The schools would then set rates the same for all students on whatever model they choose? I’m curious how you see the changes taking place if instate/OOS were no longer a factor. I’m honestly serious, totally open mind. I’m asking because I don’t know how that system would work.</p>
<p>LOL, I wasn’t talking to you, GF. My post #87 referencing Maryland was in direct response to, and quoting from, Taxguy’s post #86. I think that’s rather obvious. Certainly Taxguy understood and responded directly to my point in post #88. </p>
<p>Perhaps the fact that Taxguy is the OP, and a good part of this thread has been dominated by discussion of his home state’s scholarship program for residents, and whether taking the Maryland money is “double dipping” … might have just been a little teensy clue that my Maryland comment was directed at him?</p>
<p>I have always thought that the concept of “instate” tuition was sketchy. Many people seem to feel that since the state taxpayers support the state universities, they should get a big discount from the normal tuition and certainly an admission preference. </p>
<p>This argument might have held weight 20 years ago,but the economics of state universities have changed a great deal. For many state universities, the funding provided by the state is lower than ever and is still decreasing. Moreover, a lot of revenue provided state university systems, especially top notch , well known state universities, comes from FEDERAL money and FEDERAL grants. Maybe I am missing something,but this says to me that all U.S. Taxpayers are supporting many if not all of the major state universities. Moreover, every state university does want a number of out of state people for diversity reasons besides the extra money that they might get.
As for the fact that state taxpayers pay taxes to that state and should be a benefit, what about the fact that if someone establishes residence for even one year before attending the school, they get instate tuition throughout their college career in that state. Does that make sense? What about kids that are granted in-state tuition due to merit reasons? Does that make sense?</p>
<p>People criticize me for not trying to live within the legislative intent of the law. I am not god, as someone rightly noted. I don’t know what is on anyone’s mind. I can only use the law as it is written. In fact, it is generally understood among jurists that legislative history only becomes important when the law is very unclear. I used the law as written. There was nothing unclear about what was done.</p>
<p>Taxguy has provided enough information here to cause his daughter problems at Cincinnati, given high probability that a relevant UCinn administrator reads CC too.</p>
<p>Higgins, Taxguy is a true patriot and follows all the rules 100%. His D has nothing to fear- it is peons like us who pay what we are billed without question who are the villains of this piece.</p>
<p>taxguy, I do find it ironic , considering you think the concept of “instate” rates is “sketchy,” that you would then have made such an effort ,as a Maryland resident , to get these “sketchy” instate rates from Ohio!</p>
<p>OP reminds me of those who itch & moan about paying taxes, then itch and moan about the govt not subsidizing services as much as they think they should.</p>
<p>The main reason these rules are in place is because they do bring in additional revenue to the states, allow politicians to point where some of the money, and even if it’s just 5% that a school is getting from the state, that’s better than nothing. For that matter, even full tuition paid does not cover the cost of educating a student, according to the colleges. ALso, changing anything in place like this, is very difficult. There are any number of schools that don’t bother to enforce their in state vs OOS tuition differentials and just go by how the student fills out the forms. </p>
<p>With the states, it’ s also a matter of control and power that the state has over the colleges. They are not about to give that up, even as they decrease what they contribute to the schools. We are seeing cuts everywhere in this regard, but, I don’t see UVA or Pitt or any of these schools that have been talking going private being able to do so in the foreseeable future. I’ve heard UVA and W&M alus grousing about this for 20 years now. The prediction was that at least some of the school at those universities were going to be private by now. Nope.</p>
<p>As a resident of the state of MD, I have no problem whatsoever with taxguy’s using the MD delegate’s scholarship for his daughter’s education in Ohio and if there was a legal way for someone in Ohio to gain instate tuition at UMDCP, that wouldn’t bother me either.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The (frankly vicious) level of resentment shown above and from several other posters baffles me. I’ve followed the entire thread and don’t see how playing the in-state, out-of-state tuition game by the rules laid out by the states is any different from finding the most advantageous strategies to gain admission to “elite” schools. These strategies exist for anyone who wants to use them and if the states in question don’t like them they can certainly change them. If they don’t care, why should I?</p>
<p>The remarks about “flaunting” wealth are particularly nasty; why so much anger?</p>
<p>The U of WI has as part of its mission serving the whole state, not just the on campus education of students. Hopefully other states’ flagship schools also differentiate themselves by trying to be useful to all sorts of state residents (think university extension services, including those in agriculture).</p>
<p>There is a reason taxguy chose his business related moniker instead of another one. His focus, not mine.</p>
<p>Greenwich - The Restructuring Act was signed on July 1, 2005. Although sevmom is bringing valid information to the discussion, your reaction that any student not already enrolled might worry is about eight years late.</p>
<p>While I don’t think any of those ways are really “sneaky”, I’m sure some of them are used. Others are just silly. Military members usually pick their domicile from either their home state (before they entered the military) or maybe one where they own a home and plan to return. Most don’t pick the state based on college. We were military and had Texas as our home of record since my DH was from there. He retired before our first started looking at colleges, so we had to claim our current state as our home of record per VA laws (ie we became residents when my DH retired and we stayed in the state). Some states will offer in-state tuition rates for military members who are residing in the current state at the time the student is applying for college.</p>
<p>My DS used “non-sneaky” ways to gain in-state tuition offers in two states, TX and SC. Some schools offer in-state tuition rates as part of their scholarship offers. So if your student is looking at schools check into their scholarships.</p>
<p>I don’t see any problem in anyone getting in state rates from an OOS public college if the the college permits it and no lie is put on the paperwork to get it. You don’t have to jump up and down each year and remind the school you are OOS, if that is the way they are handling the paperwork unless there is an outright mistake being made. </p>
<p>In my area, the registrars offices of some of the ccs basically tell you to check the local box. There are a lot of families who pay for a course or two for au pairs, and they certainly do not qualify for instate rates, They are internationals for goodness sakes, and here for a limited time. But that’s the way it’s been done for 15 years that I know about. If the system ever cracks down on this, the practice will stop, but in this case they just don’t care, and have not set themselves up for OOS kids. You want to be the lone one paying those rates, go right on ahead, but in such situations, going with the flow is just fine,as far as I am concerned.</p>
I’m glad to see that someone else spoke up for DAAP at the U of Cincinnati. On the whole, UC is not highly ranked, but the College of Design Architecture Art and Planning is. I think their not-widely-known cooperative Bachelor’s in Urban Planning in DAAP is an amazing program. (By the way, the coop engineering programs at UC are great, too.)</p>