Search News


Browse Archives

News

Go Ask Arne

July 2, 2009

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

When Gov. Ed Rendell decided Pennsylvania State University didn't deserve federal stimulus dollars, the university's president took his complaints to the man holding the purse strings.

In a June 29 letter, Graham Spanier urged U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan to reject Rendell’s application for education-related stimulus funding, hoping this would “compel” the governor to share the dollars with Penn State. Rendell has argued that Penn State and three other "state related" institutions are not entitled to the money, because they "are not fully public universities." Unlike Pennsylvania's state-owned institutions, state-related universities are granted greater autonomy in exchange for receiving a smaller portion of state appropriations.

“If the Department approves this application as it is written, it gives governors in every other state the ability to pick and choose which public institutions they may support with federal dollars,” Spanier wrote.

“Penn State’s role as a public institution of higher education is clear in Pennsylvania statutory and case law. It is not in the Governor’s power to arbitrarily redefine the legal status of institutions simply because he does not exercise ‘absolute control’ over them.”

Penn State officials take issue with Rendell's assertion that the university is only quasi-public, but there’s some irony to the institution's position. It has previously used its “state related” status as justification for not operating like a public institution in many ways. For years, for instance, Penn State refused to publicly release the salaries of its employees, including that of legendary head football Coach Joe Paterno, citing its state-related designation. The university released the information only after it was so ordered by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.

Chuck Ardo, the governor’s press secretary, said Rendell was justified in leaving some universities out of the application for funds.

“We understand President Spanier’s frustration, but the reality is that the governor had very difficult choices to make in an unprecedented economic climate,” he said. “However, the federal law is clear that the governor is authorized to make the decisions.”

Asked what the governor made of Spanier’s letter, Ardo said Rendell “was surprised the president chose this course of action.”

Officials at Temple University and the University of Pittsburgh, both of which are state-related, acknowledged late Wednesday that they had also sent letters to the Education Department.

“We understand that these are very challenging times and that difficult financial decisions need to be made because we have been making such decisions ourselves,” Pittsburgh officials said in a prepared statement. “Still, we are stunned that the administration would advance a proposal that would impose very significant new tuition burdens on tens of thousands of Pennsylvania students and their families and that would cause significant harm to institutions that are widely considered to be among this state’s most important engines of economic growth.”

Officials at Lincoln University, the fourth state-related institution, could not be reached for comment.

Penn State Defends Public Status

While Rendell has taken a hard stand of late on the stimulus money, the state’s preliminary application for State Fiscal Stabilization Funds, which are distributed through the stimulus program, actually included $20.3 million for Penn State. Pittsburgh, Temple and Lincoln were expecting $10.2 million, $10.5 million, and $870,000, respectively.

Something changed, however, between that initial April 24 application and the state’s final June 26 application, which includes no requests for supporting state-related universities. Pennsylvania is among a handful of states that has yet to set a budget for the 2010 fiscal year, which began Wednesday, and the decision to change the stimulus application came amid growing pressure on financial resources.

The debate over stimulus funding has opened a wider conversation about where state-related institutions fit within Pennsylvania’s system of public higher education. Rendell’s office points to numerous areas where state-related universities march to the beat of their own drums, even when the governor would prefer them to act more like public universities. Ardo cited tuition policy as one such area.

“[Rendell] has been adamant in insisting that [state-owned institutions] take every step possible in holding down tuition, and they have done so,” he said. “The state-related universities are independent and have not been as successful in holding down tuition.”

Undergraduate resident annual tuition at Penn State was about $13,000 this year for a full-time student, an increase of 5.9 percent over the previous year. The Pennsylvania State System of Higher Education charged its undergraduates $5,358 in 2008-09, which did not represent an increase from last year.

“The unspoken part of that equation is that if their tuition increases are less than ours it’s because they are receiving more state aid,” said Lisa Powers, a spokeswoman for Penn State.

Terry W. Hartle, senior vice president for government and public affairs at the American Council on Education, said he was troubled by the precedent Rendell may set with the stimulus debate.

“I think it’s always dangerous when an elected official can unilaterally decide whether a college or university is a public or private institution, particularly when there’s a pretty clear history of a university being public,” he said.

“This is sort of [Rendell saying] 'when we like them we’ll call them public institutions, when we don’t we’ll call them state related,' ” Hartle added. “It sounds like the governor would like to have it both ways himself.”

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on Go Ask Arne

  • Both ways....
  • Posted by PA Higher Ed. on July 2, 2009 at 6:45am EDT
  • The problem continues to be that Penn State and the like want it both ways. The want the benefits of being a public like state funding and stimulus money but they want the privilege of the privates when it comes to public disclosure and salary caps that might prevent them from attracting top talent. Should they be allowed to have it both ways? Either you are public and abide by those regulations or you are not and do not reap the benefits.

  • Posted by Huw on July 2, 2009 at 8:00am EDT
  • Penn State is the poster child for state subsidized educaton for wealthy Pennsylvanians

    and the two tier system of higher ed. Wealthy students go to the main campus, poor

    students commute to satellites. The admissions data for main campus suggests a

    pattern of racial and economic discrimination. Before this university receives any stimulus

    funds or any other funds for that matter the state should insist on major changes,

    tuition cuts, givebacks and probably the replacement of Spanier and his board.

    This university has failed in its mission. Rendell is 100% correct - not another dime!

  • Penn State, the stimulus package, and Governor Rendell
  • Posted by feudi , FAO on July 2, 2009 at 8:45am EDT
  • A larger question to me is what happened to the funds from the so-called stimulus package? It is not just Penn State that is searching for these funds. I've seen dramatic cuts in funding for other federal programs that we were assured would be increased. One program for disadvanatged students was slashed by 26% when we were told to expect a significant increase. Sure, Penn State is playing both sides of the fence, but so is the entire political class during this economic crisis, including our illustrious Governor. As is always the case in Pennsylvania, follow the money!

     

  • A Tangled Web
  • Posted by T.R.M. , Associate Professor at PA State System of Higher Education on July 2, 2009 at 8:45am EDT
  • Governor Rendell has it exactly right on this specific issue, even though his record on Higher Ed issues in Pennsylvania has been atrocious (though marginally better than the records of his immediate predecessors in office). Finally, someone is calling Penn State to account for its glaring hypocrisy: crying poverty and begging for money from the state on one hand, then on the other hand thumbing its nose at the state whenever it wants to do its own thing. Forget the percentage-of-increase comparison for tuition rates between Penn State and the PASSHE institutions: Look at the raw numbers! Penn State's tuition is more than double what the "public" institutions charge. The same is true at Penn State's branch campuses, where full time faculty teach 3/3 loads (compared to 4/4 for PASSHE professors, which is deceiving, because rising class sizes over the past decade have made the PASSHE load more like 5/5) are better compensated, and get more research support.

    A bigger but separate travesty is that the "state owned" universities in the PASSHE (so named when the system was created in the 1980s because the state then took an "ownership share," providing more than half of the universities' operating funds through state appropriations) currently receive less than a third of their operating budgets from state appropriations. Yet the PASSHE institutions remain under the "absolute control" of the state, despite the state's dereliction of its ownership responsibilities. Perhaps Inside Higher Ed could put together a story about that.

  • In Spanier's Own Words
  • Posted by veblen , Gadfly at Penn State on July 2, 2009 at 9:15am EDT
  • Here is Spanier's take on the situation when the Commonwealth was considering including state-related universities in the state's right-to-know law.

    But we are very concerned about Right to Know legislation that would force the University to make information public that could undermine the operations of the university. There are dozens of examples of information that if made public could interfere with and undermine the quality of Penn State or erode privacy

    Penn State and three other universities-University of Pittsburgh, Temple University, and Lincoln University--have been singled out for such intrusion. No other state-aided universities or private universities that receive appropriated funds are included in the legislation as drafted. These other universities receive tens of millions of dollars in state appropriation every year.

    This proposal goes far beyond making Penn State accountable for how it spends public funds. Should such legislation pass, we would be treated as if we were part of state government, as if we were a state agency. We are not. We are a university that operates in a highly competitive environment. We are put at a competitive disadvantage when certain information must be revealed that is proprietary, or where such revelation would put us at a disadvantage.

  • A Very Sad Case
  • Posted by Mad PSU Alum , Alum at PA on July 2, 2009 at 9:15am EDT
  • Too bad having a popular football team does not make you a public institution. You have to act like a public institution (i.e., keep tuition down, participate in statewide programs meant to increase college access and degree attainment, have some public accountability) to truly be considered a public institution. Penn State has abandoned its land grant and public institution missions in pursuit of prestige. It is now the most expensive “public” in the nation and they continue to attract wealthier and wealthier students. They only claim to be public when it comes appropriation time. The rest of the year they claim not to be public. Until PSU makes the hard decisions to start focusing on its original mission of being an access point for a postsecondary education and start acting like a partner with the state in creating opportunity and success for everyone the pocket book should be slammed shut. I love PSU but I see them as the prodigal son. They have wondered from home and gone into bad paths and we are all waiting for them to come back. Penn State needs to check itself and return to its land grant roots. As things are they are a very sad case.

  • Posted by Byron , Graduate Student on July 2, 2009 at 9:45am EDT
  • Everyone is forgetting that Penn State and the University of Pittsburgh are world-class institutions. It is hard to put a dollar figure on what they contribute to the local communities and the Commonwealth. Countless employees in this state, and for that matter, for the state, are products of these institutions. PASSHE schools are not world class.
    Interestingly, the state-related schools are not completely state owned, but several of the board of trustees are state appointed. Therefore, the Commonwealth's input into the operation of these schools is evident.
    Take away funding from these schools and watch higher education suffer in Pennsylvania. Does Pennsylvania want world class universities or sad, depressed universities that do not attract any students?

  • Don't give them a dime
  • Posted by Another PSU Alum , Alumni at PSU on July 2, 2009 at 9:45am EDT
  • Any money given to Penn State will go straight to the football teams coffers for a new jacuzzi. Penn State treats low income students like cash cows, stuffing them into over-crowded under-staffed "branch" campuses. These branch campuses function as a 2nd class institution, charging the same fees for inferior service and providing overworked adjuncts and all the tenured lunatics who they can't get rid of.

    The state legislature should just "nationalize" (or the state version there of) the University and straighten it out. Fire Spanier for his out-of-line requests, and disband the sports program so that the University can focus on educating Pennsylvanians instead of pretending that its a Triple-A sports team franchise.

  • State efforts
  • Posted by PA Resident , PA at PA on July 2, 2009 at 9:45am EDT
  • PSU resisted the sunshine laws, the transfer and articulation program, the statewide data system, and every other statewide higher education program. They have also allowed their tuition to sky rocket. You cant blame this on the state either. Their expenditures have increased at rates far exceeding comparable institutions. They have increased tuition because they have wanted to spend more. The race towards prestige. None of these actions would cause me to think of them as a public institution. Hopefully this serves as a wake up call for Pres. Spanier and the Board.

  • Penn State envy?
  • Posted by feudi , FAA on July 2, 2009 at 11:15am EDT
  • I must be living in an alternate universe. The tuition rates for in-state students at Penn State range from $13,000 to $17,000, and the room rates range from $2,200 to $3,600 per year. Considering the fact that Philly taxpayers pay $13,600 per student, per year for grades K thru 12.

    Now let's compare that to my school and Mr. Rendell's - the Univ of PA. At Penn, tuition starts at $34,868 while room and board starts at $11,016. As far as transparency, it was much easier to get this data from the Penn State website than it was on the Penn website.
    I know for a fact that Penn gets million each year in federal and state grants, but I do now have those numbers handy at the moment.

    There may be reasons to criticize Penn State in this budget battle, but it's cost of attendance is certainly not one of them. My question is if Penn State, Pitt, Temple, and Lincoln are being cut by about $45 Million, where are those stimulus funds going?

  • Seriously?
  • Posted by PA resident on July 2, 2009 at 12:30pm EDT
  • Hm...A good point was raised about whether PA wants world class 'public' universities or not. What about University of Michigan? or Ohio State or University of Wisconsin? For those who think Pitt or Penn State don't deserve that money--the best and the brightest of PA who can't afford a private university are going to to elsewhere, and these are the schools where they are going to go.

    Can West Chester University or IUP really compete with Ohio State or Michigan? No--and by denying any funds to the PA 'state related' universities--Rendell is only hurting the economy and the futures of bright PA students who want to go to the best Universities...

  • Another Underlying Issue
  • Posted by T.R.M. , Associate Professor at PA State System of Higher Education on July 2, 2009 at 12:45pm EDT
  • Feudi's latest post, and Veblen's quotations from Graham Spanier, point to another huge issue that's at play here: Pennsylvania, among the fifty states, consistently ranks in the top five for percentage of state appropriations going to private colleges and universities. At the same time, Pennsylvania consistently ranks in the bottom five for percentage of state appropriations going to public colleges and universities. This fact may help to explain (though it certainly does not excuse) Penn State's contradictory and hypocritical positions on issues of funding and control. When PSU wants an influx of new cash, it says, "We're public. Give us what we deserve." When it wants to exercise its autonomy, it says, "We're not public, so we should be allowed to behave the same way all those other non-publics that get state money are behaving."

    This may also help to explain Feudi's bizarre comparison between Penn State and the University of Pennsylvania. The U of Penn is a private, Ivy League school. If Feudi's implied argument is that Penn and other privates should get no appropriations from the state, then I agree. But I suspect that Feudi's claims are more akin to the typical kinds of bait-and-switch rhetorical cheap tricks that Penn State partisans always use in these kinds of disputes.

    Another of these cheap tricks is displayed by Byron, whose sneering elitism is outdone only by his unmitigated gall. The trick is to answer any criticism of Penn State with a not-so-disguised version of its football cheer: "We Are Penn State."

    Come on, all Penn State lackeys and partisans out there, cheer: "WE ARE (clap clap) WORLD CLASS!" And rest easy in the assurance that because you are Penn State, you never need to back up your assertions with any evidence. Just proudly display the blue and white.

    In the mean time, the rest of us can hope that this current issue might spur the beginning of a re-examination of Pennsylvania's backward and destructive policies vis a vis higher education.

  • Penn State is World Class
  • Posted by Penn State Alum , IPRA at UMUC on July 2, 2009 at 1:15pm EDT
  • Penn State is a world class institution that is in the ranks of the private universities in this country - including names like Harvard, Princeton, and Penn. Relative to the tuition rates at those universities, Penn State is cheap. If PSU were to lose or get substantial cuts in state funding, their ability to be world class would be hurt. In as much, if PSU were to stop raising or cut tuition, their ability to be world class would be hurt. PSU needs the state dollars and the tuition dollars to be world class and compete with world class universities. Some commentors here seem to suggest that being prestigous or world class is some how shameful. PSU, Temple, and Pitt are all outstanding, top-notch universities, as is Penn. I think the state should fund the best schools for the best quality of education in the state. The PASSHE schools should get their share and should continue to have lower tuitions, because they can't and likely never will attract the most talented faculty or the best students. The real problem here is, as everywhere, that Pennsylvania needs to dedicate more of its funds to higher education and prop up all of the universities in the state. I say give Penn State, Pitt, and Temple a share of the stimulus funds.

  • To Penn State Alum and PA Resident
  • Posted by PA Proud , PA on July 2, 2009 at 3:00pm EDT
  • The pursuit of prestige becomes a problem when many of the "best and brightest" from PA can no longer afford to attend any of the major "public" research universities in the state. Penn State has a mission to serve those students and it has abandoned them. That is the problem. That is what makes them seem like less than a public.

  • WOW
  • Posted by Not a PSU Alum on July 2, 2009 at 3:00pm EDT
  • As an alumni of the Commonwealth System of Higher Education (the system that includes Temple, Pitt, PSU, and Lincoln), I want to say that there are many other alumni of these four institutions who do not take the arrogant point of view being posted by some of the PSU alumni here - that they are somehow better than those associated with the PSSHE. The statements that PSSHE institutions cannot attract talent or attract the best students and are somehow inferior is pretty baseless, given my experiences with PSSHE institutions. Shame on you for looking down your nose at others.

  • World Class...More Like World Crass...
  • Posted by veblen , Gadfly at Penn State on July 2, 2009 at 3:00pm EDT
  • Penn State is not in the same class of Harvard, Penn, etc... Go look at the SAT scores for University Park freshman and Penn freshman. The 25th percentiles in both Math and Reading at Penn are higher than the corresponding 75th percentiles at Penn State. And the SAT scores at Penn State's branch campuses are commensurate with those at state-owned schools.

  • ...Desperate times...
  • Posted by C.D.H , Private Consultant at OU on July 2, 2009 at 4:45pm EDT
  • First and foremost, Spanier should develop a little class and retract his hand from Rendell’s pocket. If you so wish to receive a portion of the allocations do so discreetly, or have one of the OTHER universities such as Temple or Lincoln act as the desperate, distressed community in need of public welfare. Such public letters are disgraceful and tasteless. I am almost certain one of those petitioning universities would have come crawling on their hands and knees begging for their portion of the money. Pennsylvania State Univ. has nearly a $2billion endowment! Develop some standards when it comes to one’s public image.

     

    And for the Penn State Alum who thinks that Penn State is a WORLD class institution that is comparable to Harvard, Princeton etc. get real! Get your head out of the factory smoke and get a clearer picture (Drew Gilpin Faust of Harvard wouldn’t be writing such public letters, begging for money). Yes, the university does have some name recognition (…football…) but that’s about it…

  • desperate times part 2
  • Posted by C.D.H , Private Consultant at OU on July 2, 2009 at 7:45pm EDT
  • Well, if this is the case, SO WHAT! The Penn State football program alone supports every single sports program on that campus. If you take away Penn State Football, all you would have left is a SILLY looking Lion without a scarf!

    A simple solution to your problem about “inferior branch campuses” is go somewhere else! You have several colleges and universities throughout the country, or you can just avoid college altogether and go work at Wal-mart. They are always in need of greeters…

  • Penn State haters?
  • Posted by feudi pandola , FAO on July 8, 2009 at 2:00pm EDT
  • For the record TRM, I graduated from the University of Pennsylvania, not Penn State. My comparison between the two instutitions was regarding their cost of attendance and as such, was hardly "bizarre" since the article was about the cost of education in Pennsylvania. The point was that in PA it costs as much for Philly students to go to our public schools (K thru 12) as it does to attend a fine university like Penn State - about $13,600 per year. Thus, it hardly seems fair for our Governor to single out Penn State as an abuser of taxpayer dollars! My alma mater - U of PA - is, of course, a very fine university, but it costs over twice as much in tuition to attend compared to Penn State and I'd bet a bunch that Penn gets as much in total government fundings as Penn State gets when viewed in totality. Lastly, what's is up with all this vitriolic hatred of Penn State, particularly from supposed alums posting under pseudonyms? They sound like Nitt wits. If the best you can do is infantile objections to a fine football tradition, then take your rattle and go home.