<p>Governor Corbett this morning released his budget, which proposes a 50% cut in state funding to U. Pitt. At the same time, he is proposing to allow accelerated tax deductions for corporations that will cost the state hundreds of millions of dollars this year.</p>
<p>How very Republican of him.</p>
<p>More money for police while cutting education. How fitting! Also grants leases for gas drilling while cutting environmental enforcement.</p>
<p>More money is proposed for the prisons. That will come in handy with the after-effects of all of the cuts in education.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, many rich highly populated townships are getting free police service from the State police, while poorer cities pay millions for their own police protection.</p>
<p>thought this was a little interesting. I was curious how much Tom paid for his education at LVC. The best estimate I could find online was from the Congressional Budget Office - from 1988. <a href=“http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/49xx/doc4958/doc16.pdf[/url]”>http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/49xx/doc4958/doc16.pdf</a> The report states that the average cost of tution at private colleges in 1970 was $1980. Putting that figures into an inflation calculator - to 2011 - shows that Tom’s $1980 approximate tuition at a private instutition would now cost $11,238. So Tom, where in the world can you get tuition at a PRIVATE college for $11,238? That’s for the average Joe…not one with scholarships.</p>
<p>An education at a public university - average price - in 1970 was $480. Using an inflation calculator that same price would be $2724. Oh, how we wish that yearly tuition at a public university were only $2724 a year.</p>
<p>I think maybe Tom’s a little out-of-touch with how much an education costs today. Meanwhile Pennsylvania residents pay far more for in-state tuition at state schools and state-sponsored schools than most other states. Why are PA residents forced to pay more for a college education at a PUBLIC college?</p>
<p>NY is doing the same thing and we have a Democratic Governor and Democratic Assembly. Our states are on the way to bankruptcy and it’s ugly, no matter how you look at it.</p>
<p>
Keep in mind that both PSU and Pitt are not “state” colleges. Tuition at IUP, CALU and the other state colleges is substantially less.</p>
<p>I mean has anyone outside of PA heard of IUP, Clarion, Edinboro, Cal U, etc.? I’m not saying they’re bad schools, but they don’t have the same reputation other states’ public schools have.</p>
<p>Any response from Pitt administration about what this means for their budget? PSU having some sort of statement tommorow.</p>
<p>I agree with str6116. The state schools are not bad schools - not by any stretch of the imagination. The state schools, however, don’t have the reputation of Pitt, Penn State or even Temple. Many students are attracted to schools that have a better reputation and a larger alumni base, along with all of the research opportunities that are available at the larger schools. But when you look at other states - say Virginia - the tution at the flagship schools is lower than Pennsylvania. The tuition at UVA is $10,800 for an ins-tate VA student. UVA has a great reputation. At University of Michigan, another good school, tuition is under $12,000 for in-state students. And not picking on our backyard neighbors, but at WVU, my child could attend there cheaper as an out-of-state student than she could as an in-state student at Penn State. Seems a little nuts. Maybe if they imposed a tax on the extraction of Marcellus shale gas, that money could be used to fund education. The lottery benefits “older Pennsylvanians” so why can’t the extraction of our non-renewable resources be used to fund the education of future Pennsylvanians - unless we want them all to move!</p>
<p>amandakayak - below is a cut and paste of an email Nordenberg sent to parents earlier today</p>
<p>Dear Pitt Parent:</p>
<p>Today Governor Corbett released the details of his first state
budget proposal. In it, he calls for cuts in state support
for the University of Pittsburgh that are in excess of $110
million. These staggering cuts include a reduction of more
than $80 million, or 50%, to our general education appropriation.
Those funds support our instructional programs and have been
used, in the main, to maintain a lower tuition rate for
in-state students.</p>
<p>State support for the University has been eroding over an
extended period of time. However, the budget shortfall
produced by this proposal - which dramatically reduces forms
of state support that have been in place for decades - would
impose a particularly severe and unfair burden on our students
and their families. Such reductions, in our view, also will
undermine economic growth in Pennsylvania as we move further
into an increasingly competitive new century.</p>
<p>I am writing now to quickly assure you of two things. The
first is that we intend to do everything that we can ourselves
to resist this proposal in the Harrisburg budget-building
process that is about to unfold and stand prepared to assist
parent advocacy efforts in appropriate ways. Our second
commitment is to continue providing the high quality experience
that attracted your student to Pitt.</p>
<p>Dr. Kathy Humphrey, Dean of Students will be meeting with
student leaders next week, both to provide additional
information and to facilitate initial discussions of student
responses to this proposal. In the weeks ahead, the University
will keep you apprised of other efforts to combat this proposed
budget reduction.</p>
<p>In the meantime, I wanted to share with you my first formal
response to this proposal, which was released to the media at
a press conference earlier today ([Chancellor</a> Mark A. Nordenberg | University of Pittsburgh](<a href=“http://www.chancellor.pitt.edu/state-budget]Chancellor”>http://www.chancellor.pitt.edu/state-budget)).
Because we also want you to know how seriously we take our fiscal
responsibilities, let me also make you aware of a new website that
describes some of the many ways in which we have been cutting costs
and enhancing efficiency, even while we have continued to improve
institutional quality during these very challenging times
([Overview</a> | Pitt’s Progress | University of Pittsburgh](<a href=“http://www.progress.pitt.edu%5DOverview”>http://www.progress.pitt.edu)). </p>
<p>I wish that I had better news to share during this week of Spring Break.
However, I thought that this news, though negative, was important enough
that I should reach out to you promptly. We really are in this together,
so I welcome your interest and will look forward to receiving any questions
or comments you may have.</p>
<p>Sincerely,</p>
<p>Mark A. Nordenberg</p>
<p>
Because there are many more seniors that are of voting age and who actually vote than college students and their parents. Why did PSU become a “state related” university in the early 70s? Money. 40 years later and how many governors/legislators of both parties later and money is still an issue. Let’s not lie to ourselves…this state has been underfunding education LONG before the latest Governor took office. Governor Corbett believes he has a mandate to decrease spending and not increase taxes…including new taxes on Marcellus shale gas. I do not believe their is enough political will or votes to do what you have suggested… unfortunately for those of us with children at Pitt or PSU.</p>
<p>I fear you are correct, algages. Education has been seriously underfunded for years. We talk about the “brain drain” and what we can do to keep our youth in PA…but with policies like this (cutting education spending) we are promoting the exodus. It’s really a matter or priorities. For example, even though DCED’s budget was slashed, do we really need to hand out money to municipalities and businesses? If municipalities cannot afford to be viable, perhaps they should merge or just completely dissolve. In Allegheny County why do we need 130 little municipalities duplicating the same thing - or 40+ school districts too for that matter? Why don’t we have one county government - one school district? We have 2011 problems but keep trying to solve them looking through 1920s glasses! </p>
<p>I hope the students of the state schools and state-sponsored schools took notice of the events in Wisconsin. They need to be seen and heard on this important issue.</p>
<p>I believe that Pitt was a private university until the 1960’s. Is that correct?</p>
<p>Thank you Pittsmom for those links!!</p>
<p>Us students got that e-mail too, I actually read it all. Now I’m just scared to see to what extent we’ll be affected… like how much will tuition increase, how much will our financial aid (I’ll assume PHEAA) be cut… gah, some great time to be a Pitt student.</p>
<p>Elections have consequences. When people stay home on election day, this is the result.</p>
<p>The proposed cut averages $3k to $5k per student at Pitt, depending on whether you count all students (27,000) or just undergraduates (17,000). I don’t think the effects are necessarily equal.</p>
<p>In 2008-09, PA in-state tuition for the flagship public schools was already the highest in the country. VT was very close, though, and some years they might take the lead.</p>
<p>Like other posters, I’m afraid college education doesn’t have much leverage on the process. Best hope is to kill the tax cuts. Recognize this for what it is, a class war. When they close off college education, that is closing off the single most important route for our kids to enter or stay in the middle class. I consider myself a conservative, but not for this. This is disinvestment, parasitic, and selfish.</p>
<p>Oh, by the way, PHEAA was already drastically cut last year, and the governor scholar program also disappeared some time over the past two years.</p>
<p>And has anyone noticed the perpetual 6-week waiting period to schedule a driver exam? This also happened within the past couple years. It used to be just a week or two. They are picking on kids.</p>
<p>Pitt was fully private until 1966. Temple was also fully private, and became state-related around the same time ('65?). Penn State was founded as a land grant school (Farmers High School), and has always had a close relationship and funding from the state. Much later Pitt and Temple were added to reduce tuition for PA students at research institutions in the two major urban centers.</p>
<p>At Pitt, the % of the budget funded from the state has been around 9%, which is actually less of the overall budget contributed by the state PRIOR to it’s affiliation in 1966. When Pitt became state related in ‘66, it received around 33% of its budget from the state, and it stayed that way at least through the early 80s. The reason why these schools are so expensive compared to other states’ research flagship universities is that PA is one of the only states without a real state-owned research university system, and it hasn’t kept up appropriations to these schools too match even general inflation (which is under the rate of higher education inflation). Although you’ll hear how bad of a job these schools have done at holding down inflation, particularly in Pitt’s case, if you actually compare Pitt’s tuition increases over the last decade, they are below the national average for higher education and below those at both PSU and Temple.</p>
<p>The thing that is a killer though is, Pitt, by far, generates far more research money (and thus jobs, etc) per government dollar allocated to by the state than any other single entity. It really is its best investment, and a big reason (along with CMU and UPMC) why Western PA has flourished in the past decade compared to so many other similar areas. Cuts have to be made somewhere, but something so drastic for what seems like the state’s top investment seems foolish.</p>
<p>Of any of you have been up to date with current events, we could be on the verge of another financial disaster with the fact that most states have extreme deficit spending. I don’t agree with the cut in funding for corporations in fact taxes should stay steady or rise to cut deficit spending, but tough cuts in education is definitely justified if we are to avoid disaster. Unless you guys want increased taxes… Cutting waste in government will take a lot longer and won’t really be enough for a significant difference</p>