I become immediately frustrated when I hear people use simple, individually held truisms to prove a point in politics. A truism is a vague general statement that is believed to be true, but adds nothing in terms of substance. Too many times when it comes to university funding, advocates against more funding avert to these arguments.
5. “Universities are inefficient.”
This is the basic crux of any attack on universities — the fundamental idea that somehow every state university must be inefficient, because well, it’s a university! But let’s dig deeper. In a speech to the Senate Appropriations committee, President Michael Crow compared ASU to Ohio State. He noted that while Ohio State has 50 employees for every 100 students, Arizona State has 12. The fundamental practice of calling universities inefficient is flawed, there needs to be evidence. I, for one have evidence of a few things that I would like the university to improve on, but even I understand that they are doing a tremendous job when it comes to their overall performance.
4. “We don’t have the money.”
I find it fascinating how somehow we have the money to fund prisons twice as much as universities, when not more than 10 years ago, the opposite was true. The fact is that we have the money, our state government just needs to choose how wisely we use that money. In any case we have a $200 million dollar surplus as of November, and without increasing taxes we can fund universities at higher levels than what we are currently.
3. “Universities only lost two percent of their revenues during the budget cut.”
While watching a "Politics Unplugged" show that included Chairman of the House Appropriations Committee Rep. Justin Olson (R- Mesa), I remember listening as he said that the universities lost only two percent of their revenue. This argument is filled with flaws however. University revenue is quite complicated. Much of it is used to keep the lights on, keep employees working and keep the university running, essentially. That money isn’t free to move around. What is used to bring down the cost of tuition, however, is the money allocated by the state, and so comparing the two is like comparing apples and oranges. Arizona Board of Regents President Eileen Klein has said herself that she is interested in a student-centered approach.
2. “President Crow is overpaid. That money could be used for tuition.”
I want to make clear that universities were cut by $463 million from state funding since the recession. President Crow’s salary isn’t even a million dollars. Even if we reduced his salary by $100,000, or $200,000, or a million, it won’t go too far in restoring the money that has been lost. The assumption that if president Crow weren’t paid that money, it would go straight to paying for tuition is also flawed, as he is paid by the state not the University. President Crow brings in millions of dollars, as some have even claimed that they have donated to ASU due to his leadership. He even invests a great deal of his own money into the school, by creating the Public Service Academy (He invested $1.2 million.) If you want to make the argument that University presidents in general are overpaid, I’ll allow you to make that, but the fact is that President Crow has changed ASU.
1. “Our universities are affordable, especially in comparison to other schools.”
In a Senate Committee hearing I heard one senator comparing Arizona universities. However, while comparing ASU to a university like NYU, ASU is more affordable, in terms of its affordability to a struggling Arizonan, it is not. Rather than evaluate what ASU costs in comparison, we need to compare what it costs the people of Arizona.
At the end of the day, I’m sure you could formulate great rebuttals to all my points. If you want to make the argument against university education however, don’t make these simple statements. I encourage you if you do have genuine responses to please send me an email. I would enjoy learning a new way for the University to save money.
Reach the columnist at jarwood@asu.edu or follow @jimsthebeast on Twitter.
Editor’s note: The opinions presented in this column are the author’s and do not imply any endorsement from The State Press or its editors.
Want to join the conversation? Send an email to opiniondesk.statepress@gmail.com. Keep letters under 300 words and be sure to include your university affiliation. Anonymity will not be granted.
Like The State Press on Facebook and follow @statepress on Twitter.
