This is about an issue that has really been bothering me for a long time, especially since a 10% tuition increase was announced for all Purdue University students in the Fall of 2002. Most of you know that I am not from Indiana, and therefore pay out of state tuition to attend Purdue University. So take this however you like, but I like to think that I am being very objective here. The last that I checked the following two things were true:

1. The state of Indiana is having budget problems and has therefore cut the Purdue University budget by approximately $80 million for the 2002-2003 year.
2. Students that are residents of Indiana pay considerably less tuition than non-residents because the state government supplements the Purdue University operating budget.

Assuming that these two facts are true, there is no reason that the status of Indiana's state budget should have any effect on the tuition price for non-residents, since the state of Indiana is not paying for any part of the tuition for this group. These people do not pay taxes to Indiana and therefore should not expect any assistance from the state. Therefore the same should hold true the other way around. If Indiana is having budget problems, non-residents should not be expected to make up for any of the deficit. But with a constant increase in tuition for all students, this is not the case. This makes the false assumption that an Indiana budget cut effects all students. It does indeed effect the overall University operating budget, but no part of the shortfall should be placed on those that are already paying the full price without help from the state. The simple answer to this problem is to have two different tuition rate increases, one for residents and one for non-residents. The non-resident rate would be much more likely to be stable (no yearly fluctuation due to state budget) and lower (either at or just above inflation). This also would result in the attraction of more non-resident enrollment.