The state of Michigan is in the grip of an enormous financial shortfall. MSU, being a public institution, is following suit. Both are in need of revenue-generating initiatives - and quick.
This is where things get weird. This is where a tuition increase becomes not only a reasonable solution to solving MSU's financial crunch, it also pegs MSU President M. Peter McPherson as the smartest businessman this side of the Red Cedar River.
No, seriously. Your eyes are not playing tricks on you. The MSU Board of Trustees' decision to keep fall tuition hikes consistent with the rate of inflation - currently 2.4 percent - in exchange for fewer state cuts to higher education is a reasonable method of weathering Michigan's fiscal storm.
Today, our state faces a budget shortfall of nearly $1 billion. Gov. Jennifer Granholm, adoptive mother to the budget shortfall by means of her 2002 election, has since announced that our state has little option but to start getting cheap - switching to Spam, getting the generic canned peaches at the grocery store, home haircuts, what have you.
Statewide budget cuts - the three dirty words of state legislation - are a nearly inescapable reality.
Granholm then proposed a 5 percent cut to state higher education to Band-Aid the gap. College students and administrators winced, feeling the effects of their own financial predicaments already. Tuition hikes on par with the 9.9 percent increase of last fall seemed a probability.
Then Tuesday happened. By limiting what was an inevitable tuition hike to the rate of inflation - which is expected to remain relatively stable, at least in the near future - in exchange for 2 percent cuts as opposed to 5 percent, we Spartans come out of the proverbial financial abyss smelling like a rose. Well, maybe not a new rose, but still pretty fresh.
Compared to preparing for the worst, the tuition increase is pragmatically beneficial to the student pocketbook.
A tuition increase will always get boos and catcalls, but a possible 2.4 percent increase compared to a drastic alternative seems feasible. Not to be forgotten, MSU budget cuts are promised at 2 percent, meaning better resources for students down the road.
Admittedly, Granholm's stance on Michigan higher education has been likened to shearing a fat sheep of its expendable wealth. However, a budget shortfall of this magnitude cannot be ignored, and we all need to shoulder some of the load.
Students aside, Tuesday's greatest winner is McPherson. By working side-by-side with the state Legislature to provide students a relatively happy alternative to sharp tuition hikes, he has essentially set a precedent for other Michigan universities to follow. With Wayne State University looking to be in tow on the tuition promise, it's now on other university presidents, trustees, regents and administrators to work with Michigan lawmakers in the spirit of compromise.
Assuredly, we all will feel the strain of a $1 billion budget shortfall. But by limiting the expenses to both parties during these lean times, MSU and Granholm should be pretty happy staying hungry for the time being.
