UNDOUBTEDLY, Gov. Mark R. Warner recently has engaged in regular episodes of cowering under his desk. Following the dramatic attacks levied against him from the Opinion pages of The Cavalier Daily, he likely has run to the safety of the Virginia State Police, begging for assistance against collegiate-level criticism. In reality, if anything has reached Richmond, it likely has been the incessant whining of college students being forced to make value judgments. If they considered the larger context of the current state budget controversy, they would place their worries elsewhere.
Warner entered office at both an economically poor and politically vulnerable time. With the state economy entering a significant downturn, the budget naturally has fallen out of balance. Projected surpluses have disappeared, leaving the chief executive with a standard, oftentimes over-simplified, choice: raise taxes or cut budgetary spending.
During his election, Warner went out of his way to emphasize that his plans for Virginia's finances did not directly depend on a tax increase. This claim contrasted with the fact that his transportation plans depended on the approval of a Northern Virginia tax referendum, a discrepancy pointed out by the opposing campaign. Virginia's voters, however, seemed more charmed by the Democrat's use of bad bluegrass music and voted him into office.
Perhaps as a concession to his claims that he would not personally raise taxes, Warner has taken the wise option of first considering budget reductions rather than blanket tax increases. He has requested that state agencies provide revised budgets, reflecting varying reductions in their projected income.
One result of such projected budget cuts is that state higher education may have to locate funds from a source other than the state. As part of that creative financing, our very own Board of Visitors has been empowered to raise tuition over five percent.
That extra tuition may not go directly into the University's coffers, but it will help balance the overall budget.
Those who complain about such an increase suffer from two misconceptions, one dealing with the nature of the tuition increase and one dealing with the realities of politics.
As annoying as a tuition increase is, it is, at its base, a voluntary "tax" increase. That is, people do not necessarily have to attend an institution of higher learning in the Commonwealth. Those that choose to do so have to make value choices regarding what to do with the money that would pay for tuition. Wisely, a large number of high school graduates elect to forego an immediate job that might pay $30,000 and instead pay substantial sums of money to have better job options following a college degree.
|
Other forms of taxation, however, would not be voluntary. In addition to the obvious example of the income tax, the sales tax applies to virtually every purchase made in the Commonwealth. Thus, any person who does not engage in the barter system has to deal with the realities of sales tax increases.
Ironically, the same people who challenge Warner's decision to increase school tuition seem to have forgotten the kind of person they elected to office. Former Gov. James S. Gilmore, for all of his easily-caricatured stubbornness, had an attribute of keeping his promises. When he pledged not to raise college tuition for a number of years, students could count on that promise to be kept, at pretty much any cost. When he pledged to get rid of the car tax, taxpayers could count on the fact that Gilmore would not waver from that position. Obviously, adhering to a promise made four years in the past has created its share of problems, but it also reflects a desire to remain true to certain core beliefs. In effect, voters know the philosophy of the person for whom they choose.
Warner, naturally, made few promises on the grand scale of Gilmore about any financial matter. He liked to portray himself as a pragmatic, nonpartisan businessman. The voters of our fair Commonwealth liked his lack of Gilmore-like stubbornness and carried him into office. Consequently, few people, especially his supporters from the collegiate ranks, should be overly surprised that he has pursued the route of increasing college tuition.
If anything, Warner's decision to break with the past tuition freeze should force some to worry about larger issues, including the prospect of raising more general, coercive taxes. Assuming that spending cuts either do not address all of the budget's needs or enrage enough core Democratic Party supporters that they have to be ceased, Warner, feigning back tears, will agree to increase the income or sales taxes.
As such tax increases will not as directly affect students, publications such as this one might not whine as loudly. Warner then might rest comfortably in the Governor's bed.
(Seth Wood's column appears Wednesdays in The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at swood@cavalierdaily.com.)
Read More
PATEL: Personal development courses support students beyond the gradebook
By Heer Patel | YesterdayThe University must rethink its approach to education beyond traditional major-specific requirements and mandate personal development courses.
EDITORIAL: Commercialization threatens U.Va.’s educational mission
By Editorial Board | YesterdayAfter all, measuring the University’s worth in terms of accrued capital, operational efficiency and numerical rankings molds this space into just another cookie-cutter institution.
YOUNIS: Why every U.Va. student should say yes to English
By Ayat Younis | 6 days agoEvery student at the University, regardless of their primary field of study, can professionally and academically benefit from engaging with the English department.
