Arizona panel approves forcing college students to pay $2000

Because apparently, university in Arizona is ``almost`` free... but some people in the Arizona government think it's bad.

House committee approves minimum tuition bill

A state House committee has approved a bill requiring full-time students pay generally $2,000 annually toward their tuition at a state university.

The House Appropriations Committee approved the bill 7-6 on Wednesday. It must pass through another committee before it goes before the full House.

But somehow, it excludes athletes...because you know, sports are more important than science... Football is the most important thing in America... /sarc

The bill has exemptions for athletic scholarships and grants awarded solely on academic merit or a competitive program.

Arizona constitution Article 11, Section 6

Section 6. The university and all other state educational institutions shall be open to students of both sexes, and the instruction furnished shall be as nearly free as possible. The legislature shall provide for a system of common schools by which a free school shall be established and maintained in every school district for at least six months in each year, which school shall be open to all pupils between the ages of six and twenty-one years.

Seems to me the bill could be even unconstitutional.

Anyway it can still be stopped if ATSers in Arizona spread the word and call their representatives...

The bill has exemptions for athletic scholarships and grants awarded solely on academic merit or a competitive program.

It says "academic merit" as well. That includes valedictorians.


Additionally, community/state run colleges are all essentially free. What you pay for when you sign up, is "administration fees". Is this abuse of a loophole? Certainly. But they're not breaking any laws. Education is hurting worst of all in this economic downturn. Raising "administration fees" at CC's is a fairly common practice.

Wonder what universities would do if students did not enroll.
Every student, nationwide, sits one semester out and refuses to go to school.
I do not see it happening though. They will pay it, because they do not have a choice.

reply to post by Vitchilo


Wow, if I was a student there, I'd being protesting for discrimination, as they just pick and choose who pays. Bias a bit?

It's hardly ever a bill to help people anymore (and if it is, one has to jump through all the right hoops and probably hire a lawyer), it's almost always a bill to grab money and kick the individual in the stomach.

.. to hell in a hand-basket.

Here in Florida, I'm seeing them changing Community Colleges into State Colleges. Most likely for the same reason of wanting to charge more money.

The topic about athletes getting a free ride always burns me up. If anything, they're the ones who are most likely able to repay their loans in the shortest amount of time, while the rest of us are destined to be paying them off for a very long time.

In the grand scheme of things, entertainers are above indentured servants.

If you can throw a football, you are special.

Don't worry about the low income they still get it for free. Just don't ask why only 7% graduate. Gotta go to keep the free money flowing

It seems to me that it's none of anyone's business how a student may have worked out a deal to go without paying out of pocket. Least of all the Government's. Unless I am missing something and we're saying the school is getting 0 for the slot the student is taking up in the class, and that isn't what I'm seeing....then I just don't get where anyone has any place to get involved.

If they don't like the system that lets people go under grants and other funding to make it free of out of pocket expenses, change the system. They need to stop screwing so hard with the individual people every time anyone turns around. Now it's the students....and where is this $2000 coming from? I don't see people walking around with money trailing from their pockets as they go past at my college. This is just wrong on basic principle.

Originally posted by Afterthought

The topic about athletes getting a free ride always burns me up. If anything, they're the ones who are most likely able to repay their loans in the shortest amount of time, while the rest of us are destined to be paying them off for a very long time.

Ahh yes. But....do you not see, we need the athletes they serve a useful purpose to the plan. All these athletes are used as distractions so we do not see what is really going on. Remember what Rome did to keep the masses entertained and distracted while they tried to conquer the world? Athletes and games. The US needs athletes just the same way Rome did.

reply to post by Skewed


Yes, I'm in total agreement with you. This is quite obvious the way certain celebrities are invited to the White House.