<p>
And when people are one issue voters or straight party voters. The problems with inadequate state funding of education in PA have been around for many decades.</p>
<p>Does anyone have a perspective of the relative impacts (esp. tuition) of this proposed cut on IS v. OOS students? I assume in state tuition would rise substantially but how about OOS?</p>
<p>Based on the way things have worked in other states, I would assume OOS will increase significantly.</p>
<p>^^If higher education in Pennsylvania has been inadequately funded, then these massive cuts are especially aggregious. I believe that Governor Rendell sought to avoid cuts to higher education in PA and last year directed stimulus funds to the universities to offset proposed cuts. Now that PA has private companies exploiting the Marcellus Shale in the state, it is particularly offensive to me that when the state is suffering budget shortfalls and cutting education funding, the current governor refuses to allow the imposition of a severance tax. “Conservative” states like Texas and Alaska impose those taxes on the oil and gas industry in those states.</p>
<p>Hopefully, the Penn State - Pitt - Temple - Lincoln … constituencies in the state can do something about this. (My impression is that messing with Penn State in PA is the equivalent of “Messing with Sasquatch” so we’ll see.)</p>
<p>Regarding Severance Taxes: [State</a> Energy Revenues Update](<a href=“Legislative News, Studies and Analysis | National Conference of State Legislatures”>http://www.ncsl.org/default.aspx?tabid=12674)</p>
<p>^^^ Agreed, imposing a drilling fee (tax) on private companies that are exploring the Marcellus Shale gas fields seems to make sense. I am not sure however, the state would get enough revenue from that single source, to cover the proposed shortfall. </p>
<p>Balancing the budget is hard work, however, higher education appears to me to be the last place any government would want to scale back on. I personally find it offensive to make those types of drastic cuts to such an important resource. </p>
<p>I have a couple of suggestions for Governor Corbett that might lead us down a better path.<br>
- Eliminate the Delaware River Port Authority… Split the bridge’s between the the two states, and allow each to manage respectively-- DRPA is a corrupt and inefficient ageny that is so antinquated it is not even funny.<br>
- Privatize the sale of liquor and tax it! Less state infrastructure would be necessary to support it. If you want to drink, pay up! The liquor laws in this state are very aniquated.
- Increase tobacco taxes…it is not good for you anyway, and you may see long run reductions in medicare/health care needs. </p>
<p>My $.02</p>
<p>Pitt is already the most expensive public college - what in the world will happen now?
[College</a> Admissions - College Search - Cappex -](<a href=“Cappex”>Cappex)</p>
<p>4kidsinarow: 2 of your suggestions involve either a new tax (Marcellus Shale) or increasing an existing tax (tobacco). I believe Gov. Corbett feels he has a mandate from the voters of PA to NOT increase taxes.</p>
<p>Your idea about the State Stores and liquor sales is one that Gov. Corbett has already stated he is going to pursue.</p>
<p>The only mandate Governor Corbett has to not tax Marcellus Shale is from his campaign contributors. In the following poll 63% support taxing Marcellus Shale: [Poll</a> says Pa. voters support Marcellus shale gas tax | The Times Leader, Wilkes-Barre & Scranton PA](<a href=“http://www.timesleader.com/news/Poll_says_Pa__voters_support_Marcellus_shale_gas_tax_01-07-2011.html]Poll”>http://www.timesleader.com/news/Poll_says_Pa__voters_support_Marcellus_shale_gas_tax_01-07-2011.html)</p>
<p>That number will go up once people see the damage that would be done by the Governor’s proposed cuts.</p>
<p>A tax on Marcellus Shale drilling would primarily be on corporations coming from outside PA who are making millions. 14 out of the top 15 gas producing states raise revenue from drillings including Texas;
<a href=“http://www.philly.com/philly/news/117622313.html[/url]”>http://www.philly.com/philly/news/117622313.html</a></p>
<p>This reminded me why I went to college OOS when I grew up in PA. If this passes, Pitt stands to lose over $100MM (including other cuts) so I expect tuition will go way up, like 10%. For our S, it’s Pitt or a private university ($40K tuition) so the difference is still big in Pitt’s favor, but less so.</p>
<p>Gov Corbett does have a mandate from voters to NOT raise taxes and that includes new taxes. I can understand the attraction of taxes that affect “other” people or corporations…but it just isn’t going to happen with this Gov and legislature. If you voted for them…THANKS…if not…get used to the new program. As far as which states tax what…I don’t think we really need to exam what/how/who PA taxes compared to other states…I don’t think it would make our state look good.</p>
<p>I am happy to see this thread. As a native “Burgher” who currently lives out of state but still owns property in the suburbs, I am outraged. I have already sent off a letter to the editor of the Post Gazette this AM. Let the gas people drill, spew their pollution, decrease environmental protections so that they can, make public education more expensive but give vouchers to ease the “burden” on the people who send their children to expensive prep schools. Who voted for this guy?</p>
<p>
A majority of PA voters.</p>
<p>Pittsmom is correct that PA can become more efficient by consolidating at the county level. MD does that because there are few actual cities and it works pretty well. Pitt was private until 1966.</p>
<p>PA residents knew what they were voting for…and against.</p>
<p>[Corbett</a> beats Onorato for governor seat - dailylocal.com](<a href=“http://www.dailylocal.com/articles/2010/11/03/news/doc4cd0e0da06fe1277566274.txt]Corbett”>http://www.dailylocal.com/articles/2010/11/03/news/doc4cd0e0da06fe1277566274.txt)
“Corbett pledged that he would not increase any state taxes or fees…”
“The issue of taxing natural gas drilling was a defining issue in the campaign…”
“Corbett said he opposed the tax because it could be a setback for an industry that’s expected to create thousands of new jobs…”</p>
<p>Wrong, just remember, most voters really don’t know the impact of their votes. How many would vote for Corbett is the university system was going to lose 50%? He’d be basking in private industry somewhere right now. Same thing with Wisconsin. That’s a one-term governor, if even that. That’s the world of politics for you. </p>
<p>Now PSU is considering closing a couple of branches. Maybe Pitt should close down one of theirs? </p>
<p>On a practical note, our S is favoring Pitt. Outside of the expected tuition increase, will Pitt lose capabilities (e.g., classes, professors, class size, programs, research opportunities) because of this? That could affect many attendance decisions. Hopefully the university will come out with some kind of assurance.</p>
<p>^I agree. My son is also considering Pitt. In spite of a scholarship, I wonder if he would be better off staying in the better funded UNC system of his home state.</p>
<p>
Most knowledgeable voters know and understand a candidates opinions on various issues (such as Marcella Gas and education) before voting. If your point is that most voters are not knowledgeable…well that may be part of how this state managed to get into the situation we are currently in.
I don’t know…maybe all those that don’t have children in college or those that have continued to vote for politicians in this state that have underfunded education? Perhaps those that want state government and costs reduced regardless of where the ax needs to fall? Perhaps everyone that would vote for anyone that assures them that they will not raise taxes? I wouldn’t be too confident that Gov Corbett would not have been elected even if voters knew in advance that he would cut funding to colleges by 50%…after all this is PA.</p>
<p>Who voted for this guy?</p>
<p>[Voter</a> apathy is hard to fight: Pa voter turnout back under 50 percent | PennLive.com](<a href=“http://www.pennlive.com/editorials/index.ssf/2010/11/voter_apathy_is_hard_to_fight.html]Voter”>Voter apathy is hard to fight: Pa voter turnout back under 50 percent - pennlive.com)</p>