Senator Eliot Shapleigh - El Paso, Texas

 "Don't Mess with Texas' Universities"

"It's mighty reckless to mess with Texas."  Many of us remember Johnny Dee & The Rocket 88's singing those now-famous lyrics when the "Don't Mess with Texas" campaign launched in 1986.  

The message was clear—don't trash the Lone Star State.  But today, over twenty years later, we know more than a few dared and some, sadly, succeeded.  

These polluters didn't trash us with garbage on the road.  They did it through a subtler, more complete way—through winner-take-all, scorched-earth politics.  For over twenty years, these individuals promised honest, hard-working Texans one thing for a vote, and then gave us another.    

What they gave us is failed government.  As they lined their pockets with tax breaks and lucrative government contracts, they decimated state funding—and with irresponsible under-funding foster children would die; under-supervised youth prisoners would be sexually abused; the mentally handicapped would be neglected; property taxes would skyrocket; college tuition would hit an historical high; and the governor's mansion would burn down.

In 1960 Barry Goldwater said: “I have little interest in streamlining government or making it more efficient….my aim is not to pass laws but to repeal them.”  His line was repeated next by Ronald Reagan, then most recently by Grover Norquist, whose vision is even more vivid than all the rest: "Our goal is to shrink government to the size where we can drown it in a bathtub."  

Well, Norquist ought to be proud of himself.  He did it.  We're drowning.

In agency after agency, irresponsible under-funding, repeated firing of career public servants, and consistent appointing of incompetent leadership have left entire departments fundamentally unprepared to govern and succeed against the challenges of a 21st century Texas.

So, let’s talk higher education.  With an expected population of 50 million by 2040, the future of our state will be defined by the education of our people.  

Across the political spectrum nearly every thoughtful elected leader will say to his public that in a 21st century knowledge-based economy Texans must compete and that education is the key to competition, jobs and prosperity.

So, how do Goldwater’s successors compete in higher education in Texas today?

One measure is the number of universities that have achieved Tier One status .  While the term "Tier One" is not specifically defined, a total of $100 million in annual research expenditures is often cited as the benchmark.  Based on a report from the Center for Measuring University Performance, the largest U.S. state, California, has eight Tier One public universities that serve undergraduate students.  Texas, the second largest state, has only two: UT-Austin and Texas A&M.

How did this happen? In 2003, Tom Craddick and others decided that the best way to address a state budget deficit and deliver an enormous tax break to the wealthiest Texans would be twofold: the elimination of Texas' inheritance tax and higher education tuition deregulation.

Back then, millionaires paid the Texas inheritance tax, which is a "pick up" tax on the federal inheritance tax.  Thus, instead of having a distinctly separate inheritance tax, Texas piggy-backs on the federal version, and the tax due to Texas is equal to the federal credit allowed for state inheritance taxes paid.  This system takes advantage of the federal credit to reallocate part of the total tax from the federal government to the state.  Under this system, in 2002, Texas millionaires delivered over $334 million to the Texas treasury.

At the federal level, however, George Bush led a successful effort to phase out the inheritance tax, which left a big hole in the Texas budget.  Other states chose to protect themselves from the immediate and large revenue loss by choosing not to conform to the federal change by decoupling the state inheritance tax from the federal version.  

Decoupling from federal inheritance taxes would have protected Texas against the loss of a steady and sizable revenue stream since, unlike other tax revenue streams, the inheritance tax and other estate taxes are fairly consistent and not subject to the ups and downs of the economy.   

As Texas is heavily reliant on the varying revenue generated by the regressive sales tax, it is particularly important to protect the revenue streams that are consistent and progressive.  Despite these advantages, repeated efforts to decouple the inheritance tax have been buried by Republican leadership.

With over $300 million suddenly moved from Texas' coffers to the pockets of the wealthy, Craddick and Perry had to do something to balance the budget.  Enter tuition deregulation.  Under this new idea, tuition would be deregulated, set by individual institution's Board of Regents, and float to the level that the market might bear.

What has been the result of tuition deregulation? 

Skyrocketing prices to Texas' students and their families.  From fall 2003 to fall 2007, total academic charges at UT-Dallas have gone up 66 percent; at UT-San Antonio, 63 percent.  Meanwhile, prices continue to rise.  In March 2008, the UT Board of Regents approved tuition and fee rates for the next two years, once again increasing the cost of higher education.  As a result, fall 2009's total academic charges at UT-El Paso will be over 73 percent higher than fall 2003.

At the same time that tuition has soared, state funding for higher education has decreased and grant programs have failed to keep pace with the state's needs.  At UT System institutions, inflation-adjusted state appropriations per fulltime equivalent student have decreased, on average, 17 percent from 2001 to 2006.  The declining state appropriations has impacted higher education on a statewide level.  

Take UT-Austin, often considered a crown jewel of higher education in Texas.  Within a 12-member national comparison group, UT-Austin ranks ninth in per student funding from tuition and state general revenue.  Simply put, other states are better at supporting their universities.  The University of Minnesota, for example, has $6,000 more per student than UT-Austin; the University of North Carolina, $6,500 more; and UCLA, $7,500 more.

Let’s compare two Midwest universities—both striving to compete in a knowledge-based world. In nearly every state, universities are the keys to jobs—research today unlocks the potential of tomorrow. Take a look at the University of Iowa, with just over 30,000 students. In 2008, Iowa lawmakers appropriated $348 million in state money to support and run the University. Now let’s take Texas Tech University in Lubbock, nearly the same size with 28,000 students. Tech received $164 million in fiscal year 2008. Over the course of ten years, at that level of support, Tech would get $1.84 billion less than Iowa.  

How do we expect Tech to compete?

Funding for financial aid programs have also failed to keep up with the enormous growth in tuition.  The TEXAS Grant program has served as a successful financial aid tool for Texas students in financial need.   However, due to inadequate funding, the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board estimates that over 90,000 eligible students will not be served by the program in 2009.  To make matters worse, the Coordinating Board just voted to recommend changes to the TEXAS Grant program that will disproportionately and negatively impact the very students that the state has long sought to push toward higher education: low income, minority, and first generation college students—as well as students with disabilities.

What do we do? Right now, Texans face a choice. Do we want another decade of leaders whose goal is to destroy our state’s government? After all, our government is us—it is people doing through government that which we can not do alone.

Or do we want responsible leaders who will make the hard choices to take Texas into the 21st Century?  

We can't afford to let anyone mess with Texas again.  Here in Texas, our children, our future and our state deserve better.

Eliot Shapleigh