I totally agree. What most are forgetting is that the private schools have lower class sizes and are more specialized. I hear daily that UMC is overcrowded and the quality of education has lowered. Do people realize that private schools cost around 2-3 times higher to attend? This would limit students who come from low-middle income families to only attend public education. Private colleges receive more Access grant money because their overhead cost is more. I guess the public would like to limit those students from being able to afford to go to schools of choice. Sounds selfish to me.

Clearly, incentivizing students to attend public universities is the agenda for public university admins and some legislators (though more students does mean more subsidies needed or the same pool of subsidies being subdivided into smaller units in the short run). My problem is with the public school students in this debate acting like they are more deserving of state funds than private school students.

I wonder what the true increase in quantity demanded for public education would be if reform were passed. I would love to be able to use those numbers to project the marginal impact of AM $$s on UM-System Revenue. I struggle to believe that this ratio would be meaningful.

There’s coverage in yesterday’s Tribune on the subject: http://www.columbiatribune.com/news/2010/feb/18/mu-works-in-anticipation-of-future-cuts/