Is punishing Enrollment Caps Fair

Last week Governor Taft in revealed his new budget for 2006. In this budget higher education would receive $1.56 billion in each of the next two budget years. This is the first problem for public universities and community colleges. Ohio's public colleges have seen an increase of more than 47,403 students over the past four years. Yet they are still receiving the same funding. How can we stress the importance of education when we are not willing to fund it. If we expect to our higher education to be top notch we should fund it. This lack of funding has caused many schools to raise tuition by 9%. What have some schools done to help keep a hold on rising tuition rates because of lack of funding? They have put enrollment caps on incoming classes. Schools only have so many faculty to teach so many students. If you go to a smaller public school like Central State, you are not expecting to sit in the same size classroom as at Ohio State. You are expecting more personal attention. Schools like Central State, Miami University, and Bowling Green will be punished by the new budget for trying to keep the size of their campuses under control. These three schools will see a five percent cut in funding (the largest allowed by law), because they are not growing because of their enrollment caps. Why does it seem that this budget wants to force public universities and colleges to grow bigger and bigger? Shouldn't it be the quality of the education and not the quantity of people being educated? With public education cost rising, will this cause more students to look to private institutions because they can maintain cost, or will private institutions see this as a reason to raise their tuition even higher? I hope it is the first.