Washington Higher Education Part 1 in an ongoing series on questions legislators might ask
Recently the majority of state government entities in Washington participated
in Governor Locke's Priorities of Government (POG) exercise by prioritizing
all of their activities into categories of high, medium, or low. Unfortunately,
two of the largest budget driversK-12 (44.1 percent of proposed 2003-05
Operating Budget) and higher education (11.6 percent) refused to rank
their activities.
At a time when the Washington Higher Education Coordinating Board (HECB)
is calling on the state to increase spending on higher education by an additional
$1.1 billion, it is paramount that all activities be examined and prioritized.
Especially with the HECB commenting that, "the state must consider
new revenue sources if current funds can't pay for those needed investments."
Before new taxes can even be considered, higher education must be forced
to account for the billions already allocated to the system.
Consider the following findings of Dr. Harry Stille of the Higher Education
Research Policy Center of South Carolina:
Washington four-year graduation rates:
Evergreen State College
42 percent
University of Washington
38 percent
Washington State University
27 percent
Western Washington
25 percent
Central Washington
19 percent
Eastern Washington
16 percent
Average
28 percent
This means our state's higher education institutions average only a 28
percent four-year graduation rate.
Washington six-year graduation rates:
University of Washington
70 percent
Western Washington
63 percent
Washington State University
60 percent
Evergreen State College
56 percent
Central Washington
47 percent
Eastern Washington
46 percent
Average
57 percent
These findings, coupled with the fact that higher education has refused
to participate in the Governor's POG, lead to some important questions legislators
should consider asking before increasing higher education funding:
With a four-year average graduation rate of 28 percent and six-year
average of 57 percent, are Washington taxpayers receiving a good return
on the billions of dollars they invest in higher education?
What is the primary purpose of the state's four-year institutions?
If it is instruction, shouldn't the majority of class time be taught by
professors instead of teaching assistants? (Please see EFF PH 12-7,
Is Higher Education publicly accountable?)
Would four- and six-year graduation rates improve if state assistance
was capped at a set number of credit hours per student? One example would
be to cap credits at 120 hours for four-year schools and 150 hours for community
colleges.
Should the state subsidize out-of-state undergraduate and graduate
students? If so, should the state be owed a refund for that subsidy if the
student either does not complete the course or does not work in the state
for at least three years post graduation?
If a student fails to complete a degree in six years, should the
state be owed a refund for the subsidy granted during the time enrolled?
Should a standard two-year basic education curriculum be adopted
by all of the state's four-year institutions and community colleges to allow
students to attend the two-year colleges and seamlessly transfer into the
four-year institutions to pursue their majors? Would this result in savings
for students and the state?
Why are 51 percent of the high school graduates attending community
colleges in Washington enrolled in a remedial course? Should the high school
that issued the diploma to these students be forced to pay the cost of the
remedial course tuition? Should the institutions revisit their admission
standards?
Prepared by Jason Mercier, Budget
Research Analyst (360) 956-3482
At a March 23, 2005, House Appropriations hearing on a bill to gut the voter-approved I-601 spending limit, Rep. Jim McIntire (D) asked a supporter of I-601’s two-third supermajority requirement for the legislature to raise taxes the following question:
"Can you name a time when we [legislators] have actually not just set it [supermajority requirement] aside by majority vote? I mean, this is in many respects a procedural motion that has no bearing. It’s a statutory constraint that cannot constrain any legislature that chooses as a majority to set it aside . . . have we ever used a supermajority [to raise taxes]?"