By early 2000, the national economy was beginning to slip from the euphoric high it had reached in the mid to late '90s. President Bush put forward his tax cut with the hope that the returns would enable American citizens and companies to jump-start the economy; however, days prior to the terror attacks of September 11th, 2001, the economy was poised on the edge of a collapse unprecedented in recent memory. As we all remember, the stock market dropped through the floor when it was reopened the following week, and if not for safeguards added after the great drop of 1929 another stock market crash would have followed. It was not until after the fallout of the attacks that economists were able to determine that the summer prior to that horrendous event the national economy was already in a small recession. The Bush Administration would argue that another tax cut, two wars, and attempts at fiscal resurrection have apparently protected the economy from an all-out collapse; however, the future of America's economy has yet to be determined. This economic disaster has taken a tremendous toll on state budgets, which, all together, have equaled $26 billion collectively in deficits.
            In Oklahoma, the economy is no better. Facing the worst budget deficit in 50 years, first Governor Keating and now Governor Henry, along with the State Legislature, have attempted to balance the budget while trying to resurrect Oklahoma's economy to little avail. Therefore, the Legislature has had to make cuts to numerous programs. One of these programs was higher education, which was cut in the end by 9.9% with a State Regent cut of .4% (10.3% total added together) to finance OLAP, the state scholarships for lower-income students. Other examples of these Legislative cuts can be seen in the number of teachers that have been laid off in recent months as well as the deep cuts in health care.
            These facts have lead to the following problem. By the beginning of 2003 OU had a budget shortfall of $19 million regardless of already cutting $25 million in the last two years as well as reorienting $13 million from administrative services to academic services. Some of these cuts have been seen clearly by students. For instance, over the December 2002 Intercession, numerous buildings were closed and the power to them essentially cut to save on heating costs. Moreover, classes were cut short and stuffed into as few buildings as possible to enable the university to save on janitorial needs and heating, just to name a few. Another one million was cut from the deficit by increasing the price of home football game tickets by $2 to help academic programs. This suggestion was actually made by students, not the administration. President Boren has also made it clear that because of all of these cuts, according to the State Regent's reports, OU had the lowest administrative costs in the state system of higher education at that time.
            At this point President Boren and the Board of Regent were left with five choices. First, the University could require faculty and staff to take furlough days which would save $600,000 a day, but would mean that (added to the fact that they haven't received a raise in three years) the faculty and staff would also lose days of work and thereby even more pay. To save $19 million, faculty and staff would have to furlough 32 days out of the school year. Obviously, this would be a decision that would take a serious toll on OU's quality. Next was the possibility of reducing the library's periodical subscriptions by half, which would save $2 million. This idea was a great idea to cut some of the deficit, but in the long run it would do more harm than good. Thirdly, there was the choice of eliminating 800 to 900 courses through sharply cutting adjunct and part-time faculty positions, which would save about $6 million. The fourth option was reducing the staff in number by an undecided amount; however, this would limit the number of services the University could provide. Last was the now well-known option of a tuition and fees increase of between $750 and $900 for current in-state students. It would seem that all options except the last would impact the quality of education at OU; therefore, the only viable solution was to raise tuition to cover the $19 million in deficits.
            Following are the details of the tuition and fees increase as laid out by President Boren and the Board: In all, the increase in tuition and fees for a resident student taking 15 hours each semester is about $812 per year. Among other Big Twelve schools OU is still ranked 12th in total costs. Subdividing this further we see that of that $812 the raise in fees is a little more than half at $434, and that in percentages the increases in tuition will be 17.5% for in-state students and 26.5% for out-of-state students. Some of the fee increases include an extra $1.50 per credit hour increase for the transit fee; however, it will eliminate student transit fees, an extra $2.70 per credit hour increase for security services such as lighting, emergency phones, and enhancing OUPD's presence on campus, and an extra $3.00 per credit hour increase for library costs.
            The total cost for in-state students to attend OU is now about $9000 a year including housing, food, books, and other living expenses. President Boren and the Regents have increased need-based tuition wavers along with the State Regent's continued funding of OLAP scholarships. Moreover, the new Sooner Heritage Scholarship Program has been established to help students whose families earn enough to keep them from qualifying for need-based waivers, grants, and loans. The Heritage Award is given to students based on a combination of financial need, academic preference, and community leadership and service.
            Most of the criticism around the tuition increase comes from students and citizens who feel that before the University raises tuition and fees they should cut back as much as possible on expenses. For instance, several OU staff members who wish to remain anonymous have stated that they are uncomfortable with the idea of raising tuition when millions are spend annually on manicuring the University lawns, on lavish banquets, and on personal expense funds for President Boren. While these arguments have some logic, it must be understood that the university under President Boren's leadership has reached an unprecedented level of prestige-- due in no small part to his leadership and influence. For instance, would John McCain, Mihkael Gorbachov, and Joe Lieberman have considered coming to OU without a former Senator as President of OU? Probably not. Unquestionably, OU is one of the most beautiful campuses in the country due to the beautiful flower decorations, fountains, tree groves, park benches, statues, and greenery around our school. This single detail makes OU an experience to visit, not just a school. Without the money set aside from that purpose, much of which was directed by President Boren, none of us would have that experience.
            Essentially, President Boren and the Regent's decisions are the best solution to a horrible situation. Staff phone calls to the President's Office and his Press Secretary Jeff Hickman were not immediately answered, so The Undercurrent cannot provide a direct quote from the President or his staff; however, the facts of the President's actions speak loudly for themselves. Nonetheless, this investigation has raised several questions, and one of the most important has yet to be answered: Will the tuition and fees increase be reduced when state funding returns to its level of three years ago, or will the new funds be redirected to another cause?