<p>Kei,</p>
<p>I realize that there is probably some cultural bias in my reasoning, but I decided to wiki the Morrill Act. It quotes that the purpose of land grant colleges was “without excluding other scientific and classical studies and including military tactic, to teach such branches of learning as are related to agriculture and the mechanic arts, in such manner as the legislatures of the States may respectively prescribe, in order to promote the liberal and practical education of the industrial classes in the several pursuits and professions in life.”</p>
<p>Considering that some states were given more funding in 1890 to form many of the HBCU’s, the Federal Government respects that states control much of the educational systems. Luckily, the states like to work together and with the Federal Government on things so one can expect relatively similar laws and policies in each state. I’m not saying that the Federal Government cannot find a way to run its own civilian universities. In fact, globalization may be making even more federal involvement in education almost inevitable. </p>
<p>Still, it is a legitimate interest for a state to educate its residents. According to <a href=“http://www.uasystem.ua.edu/UAS%20Mission%20Statement.pdf[/url]”>http://www.uasystem.ua.edu/UAS%20Mission%20Statement.pdf</a> , my university, The University of Alabama states “Institutions of The University of Alabama System exist to
serve all people of Alabama through teaching, research, and service programs. As resources permit, the institutions extend these functions to the nation and beyond through a wide variety of educational programs and services.” The way I understand US laws, education is left up to the individual states with the Federal Government stepping in to support its interests (equality, national defense, research, future taxpayers, etc). I would like to see a national university in the United States, it’s just that our laws and culture (ie state pride) make it very difficult for it to happen.</p>