This is absolutely terrible, purely from the perspective from the students. Having your four years of hard work devalued like that, just because of a political move, must really suck.<p>Worst of all, it's past the matriculation deadline for most universities in the United States, so these students can't even attend other schools that have offered them scholarships, leaving them to either drop out or go into debt.
My education was funded by scholarship and two part time jobs. I know for sure that without the couple thousands from scholarships I wouldn't make it. The pressure to quit school and focus on the next paycheck/bill was very high.<p>Now I'm (gladly) paying more in taxes to the state of California annually than I've ever received from scholarships. I think it's not a wise choice to trade off the future earnings for short term Permanent Fund dividends.
Like every bureaucracy that is threatened, they will cut where it is most visible and most painful for the public. They will do this even if the cuts don't save much money. Cutting something hidden, like administrative overhead, just isn't going to happen.<p>Doing this the ethical way:<p>1. Use loans (bonds?) to cover the immediate shortfall for students that are currently enrolled or accepted.<p>2. Raise tuition on future students to better represent actual cost.<p>3. Eliminate departments that would take a loss. (students unwilling to pay the needed amount) Since this is a state school, there is also some responsibility to the people of the state: prioritize keeping departments that contribute to the industry of the state, with relatively few students leaving the state after graduation. So maybe keep geology and petroleum engineering, while eliminating sociology and art. Even computer science could be eliminated if those graduates nearly all leave for California.
The core of the issue:<p>> The House Republican minority has said it will not vote for the reverse sweep (and other spending from the Constitutional Budget Reserve) unless the rest of the Legislature approves a traditional Permanent Fund dividend, which this year would be worth $3,000.<p>And:<p>> The rest of the Legislature is not willing to do that, because that dividend, combined with current levels of government spending, would require overdrawing from the Alaska Permanent Fund, reducing its value in the long term.<p>I guess party of fiscal conservatism ~has truly died~ never existed at all apparently.
Although that $5000 is a lot, it is a relatively small group impacted:<p>> Gonzales and 2,500 other students in Alaska lost the scholarship because the state is no longer funding it.<p>Also was it a scholarship or grant? Grants were cut in Illinois the same way. As a tax payer I’m also okay with that. Now, I’m not okay with the deadline. They should be given at least 12 months notice, OR at least prior to the registration period