Last week, Senate Appropriations Committee members proposed reducing state university operations funding by 3.1 percent, saving roughly $47.8 million next fiscal year.

Granholm proposed reducing $39 million with the elimination of the Tuition Grant Program for private colleges yet increasing funding for the Tuition Incentive Program by $6.2 million to assist students after high school, with no further cuts to universities. The committee suggested keeping funding for the Tuition Grant Program steady.

As a public university, this news is a double-edged sword.

During a time of economic hardship, it is best to have more students attending college, even if fewer course offerings are available because of budget cuts. Although students might have fewer program choices, a world-class education awaits with each course. Decreasing funding to any university places pressure on the institution to perform efficiently.

With these cuts proposed by the legislature and the increase to the incentive program, the state’s priority would shift to focus on students. Increase the number of youth admitted into college, keep tuition stable and then worry about any program changes. Only time will tell when this state and universities throughout Michigan can achieve economic improvement.

Like a family trying to balance the budget to cut waste and attempt to find whatever additional room for leisure, the state wishes to have the most efficient budget possible for the betterment of our future.

This is why it makes no sense to use state funding for students attending a private university after high school. More state money should go to state-funded universities. Although private colleges remain a fundamental part of higher education, current economic conditions should reduce the funds allocated to students attending these institutions.

Universities should work with what available funding they have to provide for at-need students — whether in the form of steady or lower tuition rates or additional scholarships. The state Legislature’s proposal to cut university funding by 3.1 percent while transferring funds from the private grant program to the incentive program shows the state is more willing to help those wanting to achieve in college while facing a financial disadvantage.

Granholm seems to be sending the right message to universities by maintaining current funding levels, but we’d rather see that money put directly into the hands of students through financial aid rather than distributed by higher education bureaucrats.