Republicans are supportive yet wary of Shapiro’s higher education proposal
Republicans Intrigued by Gov. Shapiro’s Higher Education Proposal
The Center Square – Gov. Josh Shapiro’s plan to revamp Pennsylvania’s higher education system has caught the attention of legislative Republicans, who are cautiously considering the proposal.
“List me as sympathetic but cautious,” said Sen. Dave Argall, R-Mahanoy City and chair of the Senate Education Committee. “It’s still in its very early stages.”
Shapiro’s blueprint aims to merge the community college and PASSHE systems, increase PHEAA grants for all students by $1,000, implement a $1,000 per semester limit on tuition and fees, and establish a performance-based funding model for state-owned and state-related universities. Additionally, the plan includes a $279 million funding increase to alleviate student costs.
While the public and legislators have a general idea of the proposal, they are eagerly awaiting more details.
“In terms of combining the community college and the state system, I’m not against it and I’m not for it because I need to see how it’d work,” said Rep. Jesse Topper, R-Bedford and Republican chair of the House Education Committee. “But I admire – the No. 1 thing I’m pleased about is that the governor sees the need for transformational change in how we do higher education in this state and I agree. Now the devil’s in the details.”
Topper, who previously proposed legislation for performance-based funding, appreciates Shapiro’s inclusion of a similar concept. The push for higher education reform comes as Pennsylvania’s college-aged student population has significantly declined in the past decade. In response, PASSHE has implemented cost-cutting measures, university mergers, and initiatives to attract adult learners seeking new credentials or unfinished degrees.
PASSHE Chancellor Dan Greenstein views the university system as a solution to bridge the “talent gap” and educate high-demand professionals like teachers and nurses. The governor’s support for a partnership with Google to develop certificate programs further emphasizes the goal of enhancing economic competitiveness.
However, some education experts express skepticism about the governor’s proposal. Neal McCluskey, director of the Cato Institute’s Center for Educational Freedom, argues that focusing on graduation rates and enrollment boosts may overlook the importance of valuable skills and knowledge.
“This will put a lot of focus on getting more people degrees, but gives no incentive, at least that I can see from the press release, to provide valuable skills and knowledge,” McCluskey said. “It basically incentivizes getting more students in and awarding more diplomas no matter what students learn.”
Uniting community colleges and PASSHE may also face political obstacles.
“I think the idea of eliminating duplicative programs makes sense, and in theory consolidation could create money-saving efficiencies,” McCluskey said. “But I am not optimistic about actually cutting duplicative programs – people they employ will work very hard politically to keep them and may well succeed.”
McCluskey suggests cutting subsidies as a means to achieve more efficient higher education. He believes that schools should rely on funding from students who pay with their own money or voluntarily given funds.
The responsibility to improve Pennsylvania’s higher education system does not solely rest on the General Assembly.
“This is not just a state government problem to fix: the universities and the colleges need to also be heavily engaged in creating degrees to lead to career paths here in Pennsylvania,” Topper said.
Despite the challenges, recent changes have fostered trust.
“The reason we saw increased funding for PASSHE is because they showed a willingness to engage in transformational reform,” Topper said. ”As long as institutions show a willingness to do that, I think we can continue our relationship with them.”
However, the governor’s budget proposal of $48.3 billion, a 7% increase from last year, may pose difficulties.
“The most difficult issue is going to be determining what we can afford. The governor’s numbers are very different from the Independent Fiscal Office’s,” Argall said. “And we do not want to repeat the mistakes made in California and New York where they spent themselves into deficits, they blew through their reserves … we need to look at the numbers and see what’s realistic and what’s phony.”
What legislative measures does Shapiro plan to introduce in support of his proposal, and how might the Republican-controlled Legislature respond?
They know or can do.”
Despite differing opinions, most agree that the proposal has opened up a necessary conversation about the future of higher education in Pennsylvania.
Shapiro plans to introduce legislation to support his proposal, and it remains to be seen how the Republican-controlled Legislature will respond. Regardless of party affiliation, the focus should be on creating a higher education system that equips students with the skills and knowledge they need to succeed in an ever-changing workforce.
As the proposal continues to evolve, it is crucial for all parties involved to carefully examine the details and consider the potential impact on students, universities, and the state as a whole. Only through thoughtful analysis and collaborative decision-making can we ensure that Pennsylvania’s higher education system remains strong and responsive to the needs of its citizens.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
Now loading...