The California State University system is about to get its own version of Fix UC’s revolutionary college payment plan.
While not currently live, the organization’s second plan is expected to be published via a sister website sometime in the coming months.
In January, the editorial staff of the Highlander, UC Riverside’s student newspaper, published its nine-month brainchild, the UC Student Investment Proposal.
The plan is meant to combat increasing tuition costs and eliminate graduate debt by radically changing the way students pay for university education. After submitting its proposal to the UC Board of Regents, Fix UC received widespread media attention as well as signs of interest from the UC Regents themselves.
Rather than a student ““ or a student’s parents ““ paying an up-front sum every term, according to this plan, college attendance would be free of charge until the student graduates and secures employment. Once they do, they are committed to annual payments of five percent of their income to their UC alma mater for 20 years.
Despite this initial success, the proposal was not a perfect solution. For instance, the Fix UC leadership is adamant that its proposal completely replaces the existing system, eliminating student’s ability to choose up-front, traditional payments rather than long-term income commitments.
Additionally, it does not adequately account for differences of post-graduate income. Someone making $30,000 a year will end up paying the university far less than someone making $200,000. Such a disparity functions like collegial income redistribution.
The Fix CSU plan will likely function in a similar manner, problems and all, but with adjustments made to the logistical details.
Since a CSU education costs both the state and students significantly less than a UC education, it can be assumed that the financial commitment for CSU graduates will be lower than their UC counterparts.
But Fix UC’s interest in CSU comes from a shared financial crisis. Just as the UC system has experienced enormous tuition increases over the past couple of years, the CSUs have been hit hard as well. Last year, the CSU Board of Trustees approved two tuition increases totaling 21 percent. In a university system predicated on affordable and accessible education, if such increases continue, many CSU students might reconsider their financial ability to pursue higher education.
The question remains whether Fix UC will be able to generate the same level of interest in its new payment plan among CSU students as it did with the UC population.
While CSU students have been just as aggressive in their protest of tuition increases and state reductions in funding for higher education, that aggression does not guarantee CSU students will be eager to support the new proposal.
_Email Padgett at hpadgett@media.ucla.edu. Send general comments to
opinion@media.ucla.edu or tweet us @DBOpinion._