Rep. Barrett fights for Minnesota college students, families
As session gears up, Barrett offers quick solution to lower U of M tuition costs
St. Paul – Families across the state know that the University of Minnesota’s tuition costs are simply too high. Dreams are dashed for students who are unable to attend this public school because of exorbitant tuition. With the recent start of the 2013 legislative session, I have a common sense plan to fight for Minnesota’s students and their parents.
You see, the U of M charges Minnesotans $13,524 for tuition and fees while charging just $18,774 to non-residents. This amounts to a “home town” discount of only $5,250.
In comparison, Nebraska charges Cornhusker kids just $6,480 while charging non-Nebraska residents $19,240 to attend their school. The University of Michigan charges future Wolverines $13,000 while charging non-Michigan residents $39,000. At the U of M president’s former school, Stony Brook University, non-New Yorkers pay 300 percent more to attend compared to New York residents.
The U of M charges in-state students more than every Big Ten school but two, while the rate they charge non-residents is lower than every school in the conference. The combination of the two makes the U of M extremely unfriendly to Minnesota students wanting to become a Golden Gopher.
This large difference between resident and non-resident tuition rates is the norm, not only in the Big Ten but also all over the country. This is because families already contribute to their local schools in a very large way. Minnesota taxpayers contribute over $10,000 per year to the university for each student who attends it.
The data is clear: Minnesota kids who wear maroon and gold are subsidizing the cost of tuition for non-residents. This non-resident tuition “subsidy” needs to end, and end quickly, as the U of M needs to be more accountable to Minnesotan families who are in need of the help.
This week I met with representatives of U of M President Kaler and the school’s administration to find a solution to the inequity in tuition rates for Minnesota kids. It is my preference to work directly with the school rather than ruling through law.
This is an easy fix, and together we can fight for Minnesota’s students and families. My door is always open to hear your ideas, suggestions and concerns. Please do not hesitate to contact my office if I can be of assistance to you.
—30—