MA: Mideast College Athletic Act (Statute)

[tmthforu94]

Where do their profits from merchandise currently go?

[tmthforu94]

Should this be isolated to colleges that specifically take state funding? I know there are few that don't, but just to be clear.

Agreed - private institutions should not be forced to abide by this.

I actually like the idea of this bill focusing more on rising tuition costs - as someone who just finished the college decision-making process, I can guarantee cutting tuition costs would provide a HUGE relief to middle-class Mideasterners.

Actually, I'd take it a step farther - It'd be nice if this money was used to guarantee each public university be required to implement a four-year tuition freeze.

[tmthforu94]

Tmth is echoing my concerns more articulately.

25 percent is the max that should be allowed to be mandated by schools that receive state funding and all of it going to reduce tuition costs.

My concern is that 25% isn't enough.  Would this do as a compromise?

How about 35% or 40%, with all of it going to reduced tuition costs?

I'm still skeptical on this, but if it's going to pass, I'd like to see something through that at least will provide relief to Mideast families.

[tmthforu94]

What exactly is wrong with 50%?

Unless we're going to be very specific with how it's allocated, such as reducing tuition costs or implementing a four-year "tuition freeze", I think the current wording is very...broad, and state-run colleges would be able to find a lot of loopholes if it just says "educational programs".

Additionally, why not just make it campus-wide, not just for athletics, that a percentage of all merchandise profits be put to educational/tuition-cut use? What's the argument for just keeping it with athletics?

[tmthforu94]

I now see a reason as to oppose this.

Motion to end debate and move to a final vote on this bill.

Please no. It's good to have debate and discussion - we're currently trying to find a way to make this bill more acceptable to both sides.

[tmthforu94]

Does everyone understand what the definition of "four year tuition freeze"? Perhaps it should be better clarified - how I meant it was a "guarentee" that for all four years, your tuition won't raise. So, even if tuition for incoming Freshmen would be $12,000 your Junior year, you'd still pay what it was when you entered, say, $11,000.

[tmthforu94]

This amended bill will bring relief to thousands of Mideastern families. I urge the Assembly to pass this act.

[tmthforu94]

Seeing no further debate, voting on the amendment is now open.  This will be a 24-hour vote.  Members will vote AYE, NAY, or ABSTAIN.

Is an amendment needed, considering HappyWarrior's response to the amendment? Not sure if the word "amenable" is definitive enough of his intentions, as I only vaguely know of the word.

[tmthforu94]

Is this a four-year tuition freeze that applies to the individual classes or for next four years (as in, is it "Your tuition will remain the same for all 4 years of your career"), or in 2016, colleges can raise tuition?

My intention was "Your tuition will remain the same for all 4 years of your career." So, let's say this year, my tuition is 9,000 a year. It'll be that for the next four years. But for an incoming freshman next year, tuition could be 9,500, and it'll stay like that for four years.

This mainly gives families a more concrete number on how much college will cost without having to worry about tuition skyrocketing during your time.

[tmthforu94]

OK.  Well that's not a tuition freeze, so we'll have to amend that as well.

Hmm, well then you'll have to help with proper wording. Last year during my college "recruitment", Kansas advertised it as a "four year tuition freeze". That's where I got it from.

[tmthforu94]

What exactly is the change you want to make?  Most of that was in the last amendment.

Being more specific on the tuition freeze.

I will disagree with Oldiesfreak's amendment and suggest that it only be set for four years, not their entire career. A loophole - someone could go back to college 30 years from now when tuition like, 30,000, and still be able to get it for what it is now.

[tmthforu94]

I also don't like limiting it to freshman.  If someone transfers in as a sophomore from community college, they're out of luck.  It should be any incoming student for no more than 4 years (that's what CMU did, and they called it the "CMU Promise".)

I like that proposal as well. I had never really given it much though. If they transfer going into their Sophomore year, it's that rate for four years, not the rate when they were a Freshman, correct? I sure with Indiana schools had something like this.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

How's this amendment?

[tmthforu94]

Next session, either as Governor or as a concerned citizen, I will be introducing an amended version that can find a way to cut down on tuition costs successfully.