Subscribe to EspressoPundit

« This is a Test | Main | A Glimpse Behind the Curtain »


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

This is a very interesting theme you have latched on to. Given your CPA background, how would you suggest they describe it. The source of funding from general fund appropriations has been cut. The funds from other sources have increased, but often, those funds accrue to various activities that are specific to the funding source. Whereas, the general fund source is tied only to enrollment. Given the Universities myriad activities in which spending is conducted tied to grants and other sources, reducing general funds does have an impact on the availability of funds for general instruction, does it not? You criticize the use of the word "cut" but given the facts above, how would YOU describe it?


Given his background as a CPA, he did describe it accurately. Their budget has "remained essentially the same" for the last nine years while there have been "cuts in APPROPRIATED state support."

You mean "weasel." Feel free to delete this post once corrected.

As a CPA, Greg knows that more detail is required. Otherwise, the University could get in extreme trouble with funders if they tried to use funds from one source for activities not compliant with that source's restricted uses. Strings are attached for a reason. CPA's have limitations on what they can do with semantics. Of course, that is not true in a political context, but it is in a legal and fiduciary context.

Does someone have a rationale for why tuition paid is considered state funding?

What was the purchasing power of a dollar 9 years ago? What is it today? If my salary today is the same as it was 9 years ago, I have a serious cut in salary.

The comments to this entry are closed.