Jay Paterno’s Case for a Private Penn State

It was a slow Spring Break week around here, and I was scrounging for potential topics to cover in my column. Then the new governor of Pennsylvania, Tom Corbett, dropped his proposed state budget and my prayers were answered. Prayers were answered in that I had a column topic, but not answered as an alumnus of Penn State.

Corbett just took over, and I have not formed an opinion of him or his job performance. It is far too early to jump into or out of the boat on someone in a job as difficult as being the governor of Pennsylvania. But, come budget time, we see where the leaders in this state choose to put their money (technically our money).

Each year everyone around Penn State awaits the higher-education funding proposed by the governor. There are good surprises and bad surprises; this one falls into the category of the latter. To say that the cut in funding was steep would be the understatement of the year.

The proposed funding to Penn State was cut by $182 million—a drop of more than 52 percent. That cut is unprecedented in recent history and is a huge jump forward in an ongoing erosion of public support for Penn State.

While the budget process is far from over, historically the legislature rarely makes a huge difference in what the state gives to Penn State. Usually they are able to wrangle a few extra million here or there, but it is never anything that makes a big difference.

If the proposed funding is passed, the state’s share of Penn State’s budget would fall to just more than four percent. At that point it may be worth Penn State’s while to forgo the whole process, become a private university and not have to answer to this process anymore.

Penn State could pick and choose the Commonwealth Campuses it wished to retain. Penn State could decide what services to cut. As the campuses and statewide services disappear, the value of Penn State as an economic engine would finally be realized as the services provided begin to vanish.

In the most recent numbers provided by the university, the average Penn State student graduates with $27,000 in debt. That is the average. Yet every year when this budget process begins, students make some noise, the administration makes some noise and the government passes what they want.

To stir the passions of Penn State supporters, Penn State should create a state funding-drop surcharge on the tuition bills sent to students and their families. Tack the surcharge on so that the parents and student know exactly where that part of their tuition increase is coming from.

Based on the proposed funding cut, next year each of Penn State’s 96,000 students at University Park and the Commonwealth Campuses would have a state funding surcharge fee of $1,895.83 on top of their tuition bills.

Let everyone attending Penn State know exactly why they’re being charged that extra money. With the new surcharge, the average debt load for Penn State graduates will climb to almost $32,000.

Maybe seeing exactly where that increased cost is coming from, and seeing who is responsible for it, will stir people to act and stir politicians to think twice about deep cuts like this. There’s nothing like spotlighting what is really going on to get people to respond.

What is unfortunate is, if this commonwealth is to be a leader in the future, we will certainly need students who can compete not only within this country, but also around the world. This budget doesn’t seem geared to get that done.

Funding for education is being cut all across the board and at every level in this budget. Gov. Corbett ran a campaign saying he would not raise fees or taxes. That is an easy one for him to accomplish—by cutting education so deeply, he is helping to keep his promise.

But you can bet that local property taxes are going up and that tuition is going up. Those are taxes and fees that he isn’t raising; he’s letting someone else do the heavy lifting.

But it is not all gloom and doom for Pennsylvanians in this budget. There are at least two bright spots in this budget.

One is for the natural-gas industry. The dreaded extraction tax that the governor seems to fear (yet is a staple in many oil- and gas-producing states) is not a part of his budget. Like many others, I have high hopes that the gas industry will help produce jobs without damaging the environment or the waterways of this state. But someone should remind the state’s leaders that a lot of the research on this resource was done here at Penn State.

The second budgetary bright spot? The state prison system is getting a slight increase in spending.

A good thing, too, because if we continue to neglect the education of young people in this state, we may need a lot more prison space.