<p>I received this news in an email this morning and thought it important enough to post here.</p>
<p>"I read Jeremy Ring's bill (SB 1320) reducing certain students' Bright Futures Scholarships based on their major. The effective date is July 1, 2008 and it affects students who are currently enrolled in "non-preferred" majors at post-secondary schools. There is no provision in the bill to grandfather them in. </p>
<p>These students chose to go to Florida schools based on their scholarship awards. There was no criteria that they had to major in Nursing, Education, Math, Science, Technology or Engineering in order to get the full scholarship. </p>
<p>Are these students now expected to switch majors in their Junior and Senior years so they can continue qualifying for the full Bright Futures Scholarship?</p>
<p>What will happen to college programs and funding for all the "non-preferred" majors once they start losing students? Bill sponsors should reconsider the basis for their "decrease" in scholarship money for what they have deemed "less worthy" majors.</p>
<p>I'm really getting tired of bill sponsors blaming "unintended consequences" for the chaos created after they pass a bill that hasn't been thoroughly thought through. Let's get it right the first time!</p>
<p>My preference would be for this bill to drop the "decrease" in scholarships for certain majors, and just stick to giving incentives for students to major in the preferred areas.</p>
<p>Regardless, bill sponsors should amend the bill to add a grandfather provision for existing post-secondary students. This should also take into account this year's graduating high school seniors since many have already chosen to attend post-secondary school in Florida based on Bright Futures.</p>
<p>The bill number is: SB 1320. Republican Rep. Frank Attkisson is supposedly filing the companion bill in the House. Here's the website to view the bill:"</p>
<p>I encourage people to write their representatives to fight this bill. It would have a tremendously detrimental affect on the University system. Find your State Senator at:</p>
<p>As a soon to be college freshman, it seems to me like in order to avoid the consequences of this bill I have to study under the guise of majoring in one of the aforementioned majors, instead of my intended major economics. However, I dont understand how it is going to work considering a major isn't declared until your junior year?</p>
<p>"My preference would be for this bill to drop the "decrease" in scholarships for certain majors, and just stick to giving incentives for students to major in the preferred areas."</p>
<p>Isn't limiting scholarships to certain majors the same thing as giving incentives for students to major in preferred areas?</p>
<p>I really think they should limit bright futures in some ways because I know people who have more than enough money and have 100% and I just think thats a waste. It should be more need based I think. </p>
<p>But I dont trust the state to come up with an actual, reasonable, way of doing this. So....</p>
<p>I agree that some reforms may be in order, but I don't trust the FL legislature at all. They seem to go out of their way to botch up everything they touch.</p>
<p>Several weeks ago Senate Bill 1320 was filed. This
bill would have created a “Bright Futures”
differential based upon a student’s academic major.
Incentives were offered to those students who chose to
study science, technology, engineering, math, nursing
and teaching. Due to a budget crisis in the state of
Florida, a differential was required to fund the
incentive, thus the reason for the small reduction of
the Bright Futures award for the other academic
majors. </p>
<p>Parents, students and educators have reached out to
us, voicing concern. The most vocal arguments were
from those who believed that the Bright Future
reduction devalued students who chose to study liberal
arts, communication, music or other fields not
included in the incentive program. This was never the
intention. All of our students have the ability and
talent to add to the economic growth of Florida. We
chose to incent technology majors because often those
are the disciplines which have traditionally created
industry. Florida is revenue challenged. For years
we’ve relied on tourism, real estate and agriculture
to drive our economy. We’ve reached the point that we
can no longer fund our growth and the need for a new
economy based on technology and research has never
been so needed in this state.</p>
<p>However, we do recognize the value of all of our
Florida students and we will be amending the
legislation to do away with the differential. We will
look to other revenue streams to fund the incentive
program. No student will lose any of their Bright
Future grant for choosing another academic major.
Therefore SB 1320 will not have a small reduction in
its award. Senate rules do not allow for an amendment
until the bill is heard during committee. At that
time, which is yet to be determined, the appropriate
revision will be made.</p>
<p>We’d like to thank everyone who called or emailed us
their concerns and look forward to continuing the
debate of how best to improve Florida’s future.</p>
<p>How many times are they going to attempt to cut education to provide tax cuts? If we're in a situation of economic crisis, they should stop regularly creating new ones!</p>