PEG Debuts in Arizona -Levels Playing Field for All Higher Ed Students

Historically only public higher education has been subsidized by tax payers. ASU, UoA and NAU receive about a third of their funding from the state’s general fund. Tuition is another third, and our federal tax dollars and other sources fund the rest. Community Colleges rely mainly on the local tax base, tuition and fees and money from the state general fund for student count. Tax payer subsidies allow Arizona public institutions to be affordable and accessible to most students. Federal grants ensure tuition is covered for low income students. The wealthy have few barriers, but other students, especially those who want to attend smaller, private institutions have not received any benefits…until now.

It is no wonder there are few private institutions in our state. Student choice and institutional competition has been stifled because of high cost and few options.  

With the implementation of PEG – higher education just got less expensive for Arizonans attending private 4-year degree institutions. The PEG (Private Education Grants) program was passed last year and is now being implemented for Arizona students who meet resident and academic qualifications. This is a first come first serve grant that is worth two thousand dollars a year for each year in school. It caps at about 2400 students. Spread the word. Applications are available at www.azhighered.gov.

 


Comments

  1. kralmajales says

    Interesting indeed. Do you all feel that comfortable with government subsidizing private colleges any more than you do a public one? With a public school, you do have input as a tax payer, but with private schools you don’t. What if, for instance, the 2399 of the 2400 you mentioned take the subsidy and attended Reed College, Bard College, and Antioch.

    Would you be happy about your tax payer dollar going to these three ultra liberal schools AND not having the ability or influence to say a word to them about how they educate your child.

    Whether many believe it or not, public colleges and universities are greatly influenced by legislators, governors, and are run by a publicly appointed Board of Regents. Antioch…well…isn’t.

    Just curious.

  2. Villanova says

    Complaints? Contact the AZ Board of Regents.
    http://www.abor.asu.edu/1_the_regents/members/index.html

    Individual contact information is available for all of them on this site.

    Incidentally, the makeup of the Board is overwhelmingly liberal Democrat. Starting with former Sen. Dennis DeConcini, through to Fred DuVal a former Clinton White House official, one-time aide to Gov. Bruce Babbitt, and Democrat consultant.

    What a surprise!

  3. What planet do you live on? No legislators or even conservative Governors have been able to influence the Board of Regents. Remember when Symington called the AZ universities the Three Amigos and threatened to stop their funding?

    The difference is the money goes to the students not the schools.

  4. Sonoran Truth Squad says

    School choice… God bless it!

  5. kralmajales says

    So you are fine with the consequences of school choice in this case? Tax dollars used to send students to private schools is still a) a government program and b) has the potential for unintended consequences. If anyone here believes that the ASU, UA, and NAU are bastions of liberalism, you should look a bit harder at the private schools.

    Like I said, you do have the ability to influence a public school with your vote, by electing a Governor that will appoint a Regent more to your liking…AND…I THINK they are confirmed by the Senate aren’t they? I mean doesnt the strong Republican Senate have some say in this?

    Other than Regent, ORU, Ava Maria, Hillsdale, Patrick Henry, and Bob Jones, there are not a lot of conservative private schools.

    I will say this, I am all in favor of giving more financial aid to students. I actually support this frankly. However, if you think this is particularly conservative, well I am not so sure. The unintended consequences of this is that I might be able to get a few more thousand to send my son to Bowdoin or my daughter to Wellesley.

  6. kralmajales says

    FYI…

    Here is the make up of the Board of Regents and how they are appointed.

    “The Board consists of a total of twelve members: eleven voting and one non-voting. This includes the Governor and Superintendent of Public Instruction as ex-officio members, each serving while they hold office, and two Student Regents.

    Student Regents serve staggered two-year terms, the first year as a non-voting member of the Board.

    Except for ex-officio members and Student Regents, the term of a Regent lasts for eight years. Every two years, two Regents finish their 8-year term, and two new Regents are appointed by the Governor and confirmed by the Senate.”

    If you have a beef with who is on there, you need to blame the fact that some were appointed by Governor Hull (8 year staggered terms) and confirmed by the solidly conservative State Senate. In addition, those appointed by Gov. Napolitano (all those liberals you mentioned) were also confirmed by a State Senate dominated by conservative republicans.

    Your complaints about higher ed and the cost of it should go to the Board of Regents, but also to the sitting Senators that confirmed them.

  7. Sonoran Truth Squad says

    Kral, that’s the beauty of school choice… It is up to parents and students, not the government, where you go to school. Conservatives seek liberty, not indoctrination. That’s what liberals want. The libs want you to HAVE to go to a select group of schools that they then make as liberal as possible. Conservatives want parents and students to choose for themselves. Attend whatever school you want, be it public, private, secular, not… No reason this wouldn’t apply at higher levels of education. There are plenty of good conservative colleges and universities that people can choose in addition to the liberal places you mention.

    Finally, no one has ever accused Governor Hull of being a conservative, so we’re happy to share the blame with her. Also remember that some of those appointments took place in the hardly conservative Randall Gnant 15-15 Senate.

  8. kralmajales says

    Intersting points about the Gnant history, thanks.

    As for choice again, I am not sure I buy it. I think many know that what choice would do is essentially wreck these public institutions for private ones. I also believe strongly that the public schools are not out for indoctrination.

    I don’t buy the liberal dominated arguments anymore. Local school boards across the country have become more and more dominated by conservatives, and that is fine. That is the way institutions are set to work.

    What I am saying is this, beware of unintended consequences. The assumption made by some on the right about school choice is not just that schools will improve but that conservative schools will win out.

    I also still see it as a subsidy and as government sponsored education, no matter what the choice. I feel strongly that many private schools can’t compete in the market…whatsoever, so supporters of choice hope that a government subsidy taken with the parent will be what keeps some schools afloat in the end.

    It just isn’t truly a market response if you really think about it.

    Finally, with government funds, comes government regulation and strings. Is that what you want for your private schools that accept school choice vouchers?

  9. If there were truly a market, the public schools would wither and die. A steady sucking on the public till is what keeps them afloat, in coordination with attempts to restrict people from going elsewhere. Add in a powerful union, and you’ve got a system that places education somewhere down the list of priorities.

    If the private schools suck, people will go elsewhere and the schools will die.

    If a public school sucks, it gets additional money.

Leave a Reply