<p>^ Yes. It is the exact same thing, essentially. I think slightly different requirements, but not much.</p>
<p>RJK, most times on these threads I agree with much of what you write. However, in this case, these kids are absolutely correct that is is entirely inappropriate to withhold the funding AFTER sending the letters last spring awarding it and AFTER certification process. Further, the State of Michigan cannot afford to continue its brain drain, nor can it continue to operate a STRUCTURAL budget deficit, nor can it afford to continue to underfund its public schools, its pre schools or its premium institutions. There is much research available that connects the quality of life, the economic efficacy and the vibrancy of a future economy to the proper/sufficient or for that matter, constitutionally-entrenched responsibility to fund these educational pursuits. SO…axing the promise funds does NOT stabilize the structural deficit at all, but it DOES influence the state’s capacity to competitively retain students in-state. For many students, the promise funds are the difference between being able to attend a community college or simply drifting after High School. For increasingly tapped middle class students at 4-year university programs, it is the ONE source of funding that is not ruled by the arcane FAFSA formula, so it DOES help the demographic that presently suffers the most in terms of student and parent indebtedness.</p>
<p>I just can’t excuse such short-sightedness or ethical misalignment.
Now, I do agree that there may be better ways to deploy the funds presently allocated to the promise; but I think that should come with a reasoned plan in hand instead of a knee-jerk and highly arbitrary bit of partisan politics at the 11th, no, make that 12th hour.</p>
<p>Further, I think the state has a responsibility, RIGHT NOW, to close the structural deficit through all measures available to it, including as sliding upward taxation scale; a fair business tax or vat tax, re-evaluation of the way in which it presently forces local districts to bargain and pay for health care, and tie education funding to something other than the wiles of the sales tax.</p>
<p>(Don’t want much, do I? You know, just education and health, the two things that make life worth living : )
Cheers,
K</p>
<p>even if they give it to us for this year and then discontinue it it will be fine.</p>
<p>Out of curiosity, is UMich making up the deficit in finaid for people with low EFCs now that $1000 of grants is now gone?</p>
<p>^ I have asked this same question like four times, no answer. It doesn’t appear so, at least not yet. Other Michigan schools are, but I don’t think UMich has addressed the issue, yet. I could very well be wrong though.</p>
<p>kmccrindle. I thank you for your support of my views, however as unfortunate as this is, it’s just a sign of the times. I don’t like what’s going on now either.</p>
<p>Agreed, RJK, which is why the students affected should write to their legislators and put a human face to this action. If we don’t like it, it is our responsibility to say so, otherwise they assume it’s “okay” to cut : )
In response to Roman and Pro – I have mixed intel on that question. Presently, so long as Fin Aid shows the Promise as being part of the package, which it will until the budget is determined at State (eg. Oct.), they can not advance any additional funds if the Cost of Attendance has been met (eg. funds + EFC + Plus Loan gap covered). At the same time, I had asked a fin aid officer PREVIOUSLY re: what would happen in the state renegged and he’d (at that time) thought that the U. would be likely to make up the difference. I am betting that when they ran the numbers ($15.8 M for MI undergrads) they discarded that idea – why else send the emails? – but do not know that to be fact. All I know is that no one expected that move at the last minute and on the Aug. 31 bill. Including, I suspect, Fin Aid.</p>
<p>^ But I don’t know UMich would not provide the aid that was promised by the government. MSU is doing it with a much larger population and a smaller endowment.</p>
<p>I just feel for a lot of my friends going there because they’re freaking out about that $1000 (not just there but at a lot of other schools in Michigan). That was literally make or break for a lot of people that are paying for school on their own.</p>
<p>This whole situation just SUCKS all the way around. </p>
<p>Although, it does kind of seem strange that most of the larger public Michigan (besides UMich) schools didn’t have a plan B for this. It hasn’t been a secret for a while that this was probably going to happen and I really am surprised that no one prepared for it. </p>
<p>Just gotta keep chugging along and keep writing to our reps. Hopefully, Granholm will keep her word and not sign anything that cuts the Promise, but we need everyone else to pass a bill that INCLUDES it so that she can sign THAT. Ugh, good luck everyone though!</p>