The state House and Senate are currently considering two new higher education budget bills for Michigan's 15 public universities, which would modestly increase funding for MSU. More funding is always helpful, but perhaps a more important issue is how the proposed funding system, favoring undergraduate education, will change the face of state colleges.

First of all, if either were to pass, MSU would receive a slight funding increase over Gov. Jennifer Granholm's proposed budget - 1.7 percent in the House bill, and less than 1 percent in the Senate bill. In terms of the money slated for MSU, this translates into increases of $2-4.8 million more than Granholm's proposed $282.1 million.

Since MSU is facing a $40 million deficit, these increases will be a drop in the bucket.

The second, more important issue raised by these proposed budgets involves the way funds are doled out to universities based on certain criteria. The Senate bill allocates money based on enrollment, job placement, research activities and the number of degrees granted. The House bill is similar, favoring bachelor's degrees and capping research funding. Evidently, the idea behind these bills is to produce skilled workers to boost Michigan's economy. But what is considered skilled?

Meager funding increases or not, it's a bad move to try to turn academic institutions into trade schools. Sure, a graduate degree in history or journalism doesn't necessarily mold students to be economy boosters. But if universities are pressured to put emphasis on bachelor's degrees, the valuable research done by graduate students might decline.

In MSU's case, President Lou Anna K. Simon is a champion of the liberal arts. Surprisingly, she has refrained from making specific comments on Michigan's higher education budget, saying only that they each proposal has pros and cons.

With colleges increasingly pressured to function for students as a step toward a job, college administrators should remember what is good about college in and of itself: learning about life.