How Elected Officials and their Political Supporters Compete Against PASSHE Students - Part 4

If Elected Officials Cared about PASSHE Students, What Would be Different?

If Pennsylvania’s elected officials cared about PASSHE students, they would begin by obeying the law, and demanding that the political supporters they appoint to PASSHE’s governance boards do the same.

The Facts

 
Act 188 was the enabling legislation that created the public corporation now known as the Pennsylvania State System of Higher Education (PASSHE), which controls the 14 “PASSHE” universities that include Bloomsburg, California, Cheyney, Clarion, East Stroudsburg, Edinboro, Indiana, Kutztown, Lock Haven, Mansfield, Millersville, Shippensburg, Slippery Rock and West Chester Universities.

According to Act 188, Section 20-2003-A. Purposes and General Powers, (a) “The State System of Higher Education shall be part of the Commonwealth’s system of higher education.  Its purpose shall be to provide high quality education at the lowest possible cost to the students.”  (Emphasis added.)

 
From Merriam-Webster, when found in ‘law’ the word ‘shall’ is used “to express what is mandatory.”
 

Sticker Price vs. Bottom Line

 
Act 188 mandates a clear, measurable limit on student costs without ever mentioning the word “tuition,” i.e., “sticker price.” In fact, Act 188 imposes no limitation whatsoever on tuition rates, or tuition and fees, but only on the “cost to the students,” which is a limitation on bottom line—not sticker price.
 
In short, Act 188 mandates that PASSHE students should receive their education at the lowest possible “bottom line,” not at the lowest possible “tuition.”   Sad to say, that mandate has been totally ignored.
 
The evidence unequivocally shows that the ACT 188 statutory purpose of the PASSHE universities “High quality education at the lowest possible cost to the students,” has not been provided to Pennsylvania’s students since 2002, reducing the “promise” of Act 188 to empty words for those students and alumni.
 
This is not a failure of law, but rather a failure of Pennsylvania public officials to obey the law.
 
Evidence for a failure to obey the law is seen in the fact that the public officials with authority over the 14 PASSHE universities have been determined since 2002 to maintain the lowest possible tuition, i.e., sticker price, when the law requires the lowest possible cost to the students, i.e., the lowest bottom line.
 
Recall Mark Twain’s dictum: “The difference between the right word and the almost right word is like the difference between lightning and the lightning bug.”  And so it is in this case as well.
 
And while it may seem inconceivable to most PASSHE students and parents that Pennsylvania’s elected and appointed State officials would simply ignore the legal mandate of Act 188 with regard to PASSHE—“Its purpose shall be to provide high quality education at the lowest possible cost to the students”— overwhelming evidence proves that our elected and appointed State officials on the PASSHE Board of Governors have done precisely that since 2002, and continue to do it to this very day.

Giving the Voters “The Finger”

Don’t tell the children, but sometimes our “lawmakers” at both the State and Federal level have been known to exempt themselves from the laws they “make” for the rest of us.

 
History shows that when elected officials exempt themselves from a law, they tend to do it brazenly by, in effect, daring the voters to do something about it.  They always seem to be supremely confident that most voters, possessing short attention spans, will be too busy to hold them accountable.   
 
E.g., when Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act became law, protecting Americans from employment discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex or national origin, Congress exempted itself.
 
That meant that thousands of congressional staffers would be denied equal-opportunity protection, including protection from sexual harassment.  Congress succeeded in maintaining its exemption from Title VII for 31 years, but finally yielded with passage of the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995.   
 
When elected or appointed officials fail to perform sworn duties—as in this case—it raises a question of divided loyalty, otherwise known as a conflict of interest, which Merriam-Webster defines as “a conflict between the private interests and the official responsibilities of a person in a position of trust.”
 
Based on the clear language of the law and the Merriam-Webster definition of ‘shall’ when used in law, it is clear that the Act 188 statutory purpose of the 14 PASSHE universities was and is “to provide high quality education at the lowest possible cost to the students.”
 
But there is overwhelming evidence,¹ based on PASSHE’s own official data, that in the recent 11-year period (2002-2013), the PASSHE Board of Governors eliminated half the educational quality gains of the previous 19 years (1984-2002).  The evidence also shows that since 2002, the Board of Governors hasn’t provided a PASSHE education at anything remotely like the lowest possible cost to the students.
 
In FY 2013 a typical financial aid package for students at PASSHE universities consisted of 25% grants and 66% loans, while the typical financial aid package for students at “All Institutions” across America—where 75% of all college students attend public universities—consisted of 52% grants and 39% loans. 
 
If PASSHE were to provide financial aid packages equal to just the average package across America, each PASSHE student would save $1,433 per semester, $2,866 per year, and $11,464 over four years!  And that would only bring PASSHE students to the average  aid package in America, which is nowhere near the financial aid packages that would result in the “lowest possible cost to the students.”
 
If Pennsylvania’s elected officials cared about the PASSHE students, they would obey the law and deliver the promise of Act 188 to Pennsylvania’s students: “High quality education at the lowest possible cost to the students.”  The evidence shows that they are not only not doing it, they are not even trying to do it.
 
¹ http://www.amazon.com/Privatization-Without-Plan-Leadership-Pennsylvania/dp/1491295244/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1408368767&sr=8-1&keywords=angelo+armenti.  See Chart 9, page 35 and Chart 20, page 66.