Issue date: 11/19/09 Section: Editorial/Opinion

When Chancellor Brian Levin-Stankevich first introduced the Blugold Commitment, I was very excited. I agreed with most of his arguments for the initiative: that we needed to supplement our tuition in order to maintain and improve the quality of education at UW-Eau Claire. Some people have panicked and reached for their anti-tuition-increase torches and pitchforks, but I remain open to the idea, and I have tried to help people see the potential benefit of an increase in what we pay for our education.

However, there is a gaping flaw in the Blugold Commitment - one that turns an otherwise great idea into what I believe is a scam. It is the financial aid component. According to the chancellor's office, the Blugold Commitment will increase our tuition $1,500 per year. Of that $1,500, 40 percent will go to financial aid to help students afford the tuition increase.

Let me do the math for you: of your extra $1,500 you are asked to contribute to improve the quality of education here, only $900 will ever reach the intended destination, while $600 will be skimmed right off the top to give to your neighbors to help them afford this substantial increase in tuition. We are only going to see $900 of benefit for every $1,500 we put into this new system.

When I asked the chancellor about this at the open forum last week, he avoided my question about the Blugold Commitment specifically and told me that my concern was with the financial aid system as a whole. While that is not far from the truth, it does nothing to alleviate the problem. Our financial aid system is broken, and the Blugold Commitment only makes a bad situation worse. To use his words, it is a "redistribution of wealth."

According to the chancellor, the financial aid "grants" (paid for by your Blugold Commitment money) will be distributed according to your Expected Family Contribution (EFC) on the FAFSA. There are many students in college right now (including myself) who pay for their education by themselves, yet are disqualified for financial aid due to their EFC level. The chancellor and his staff have decided that we as students not only have the funds to afford a $900 tuition increase, we can also be expected to pay a $600 surcharge to donate to the financial aid of students with lower EFC numbers.

I have expressed concerns over the logic of the chancellor's arguments. If the Blugold Commitment actually is a good idea (if it is true that we will actually be benefitting from the increase in tuition), then why wouldn't every student want to pay for it? Why can't we find loans for students who can't afford the tuition, rather than giving out more free money to the students with below-median EFC figures? If the chancellor truly believes the Blugold Commitment is going to help all of our students, then below-median-income students should be required to pay for that benefit as well.

Many graduates complain about the incessant calls from the foundation office to donate money to financial aid. Don't get me wrong: I love UW-Eau Claire and will be happy to give some of my future income back to the university. However, I want to start donating to the university after I graduate. Right now I'm working on paying off my student loans and finding a job.

Before the Student Senate votes on the Blugold Commitment, the student body will be asked to voice its opinion in a campus-wide survey in the coming weeks. I encourage you to vote NO on the Blugold Commitment and tell the chancellor we cannot afford a $600 financial aid surcharge on top of a $900 tuition increase. Additional financial aid must come from either private scholarships or the increased availability of student loans, not student differential tuition dollars intended to improve the quality of education here at Eau Claire.

Page 1 of 1

Article Tools