Michigan Governor to Propose Tuition Freeze

Over the years the governors of MI have cut funding to UM from $1.3Bn/year to $350MM/year. UM has responded by drawing out of state funds into the budget, both donor and Federal. Now the governor wants to distort market pricing, and inhibit price discovery, with the promise of an offset.

My questions: 1) If the governor has inhibited the pricing mechanism, how will she know how to reimburse UM?; 2) Conversely, given prior recissions, why should UM buy a pig in a poke...i.e., count on the state to perform where it has not in the past?; 3) If students don't know what value they are getting for their money (given the distorted price, you might argue that the goods look either cheaper, or worth less), why wouldn't they avoid the pricing confusion and go elsewhere; 4) Since UM could fill the entire class with students that would pay the full ride of $35K/yr or so, why not simply go private and give up the $20K/yr subsidy that the state offers?; 5) UM spends upwards of $400MM/year on construction, of which the state pays roughly $20MM/year...why not give the state back the nickels and tell the governor to p*ss off as to control?; 6) 1/3 of UM students are from out of state, but contribute 2/3 of donations...why not bump that number up by taking the entire class from out of state?; 7) If the state is functionally bankrupt, isn't it time to give up the illusion that the state can afford either the cash, or a vote in UM's affairs?

R.Will of NY 8:51PM February 03, 2009