Missouri House to pass controversial education bill

A controversial higher education bill, which took nearly two full legislative sessions to pass through the Senate, is quickly burning through the House in hope of the bill's passage. The bill passed through the House Higher Education and House Rules committees this week, and is on the calendar to be read on the floor sometime in the next week.

The omnibus higher education bill addresses tuition, scholarships and the sale of assets of the state student loan agency, the Missouri Higher Education Loan Authority.

Debate has surrounded the bill throughout its existence.

In the Senate, Sen. Chuck Graham, D-Columbia, opposed provisions banning stem-cell research in any buildings funded through the sale of MOHELA assets, and Sen. Joan Bray, D-St. Louis County, worried loan-interest student loans were at risk if the MOHELA assets were sold.

Rep. Jeff Harris, D-Columbia, withdrew his support for the plan in a letter to Gov. Matt Blunt because MOHELA advisory firm Liscarnan Solutions, LLC advised MOHELA against the sale.

Multiple representatives, including Rep. Ed Robb, R-Columbia, and Rep. David Pearce, R-Warrensburg, oppose the tuition cap amendment in the bill, which would set a limit on the amount tuition public higher education institutions could demand.

In the House Higher Education committee hearing on Tuesday, multiple groups testified in favor of the bill.

"There was a great deal of support both by higher education institutions and university presidents," Rep. Carl Bearden, R-St. Charles, said.

Interim University of Missouri system President Gordon Lamb spoke to the committee and expressed concern about tuition restraints, but said there were a lot of things he likes about the bill.

Lamb also said he was disappointed about the elimination of capital projects for MU and UM-Kansas City.

In response to major opposition of the bill in the Senate by Graham and Sen. Jolie Justus, D-Kansas City, Senate Republicans cut funding for UMKC and a $31 million Ellis Fischel Cancer Center from the list of projects.

On Monday, Blunt announced he would include the projects next year in his supplemental budget, which comes out in January.

"We're looking forward to having the projects approved at that time," Lamb said.

Blunt detailed his plans to include the projects next year in a letter to Robb, in which he blamed the stripping of projects on Graham.

Graham responded to Blunt in a letter on Tuesday, stating Blunt had abandoned the original scope of what the plan intended to accomplish.

"Because you and the Senate leadership did not want to confront these realities, debate was shut off, and Sen. Justus and I were punished for pointing out the obvious," Graham stated in the letter. "That's partisanship on your part, not mine."

The decision to include the projects was acknowledged by some as a deal that came from hard work to fund important items that the Senate stripped.

"Those were projects that needed to happen, so I applaud the governor," Pearce said.

Bearden said Robb worked diligently with Blunt to get the projects in next year's budget.

But Rep. Rebecca McClanahan, D-Kirksville, has speculated that the decision was a way to gain more votes in favor of the bill.

"It's easy to promise that we'll do anything next time around, and I would remain skeptical about things actually happening," she said.

Because the projects could be funded next year, the majority of debate switched from buildings to tuition restraints.

Bearden said most of the debate stemmed from confusion on the restraints. Some legislators have dubbed the language a "cap" on tuition. Tuition caps make sure institutions cannot raise tuition more than a certain amount.

"There is absolutely nothing in Senate Bill 389 that prohibits any public higher education institution from raising its tuition," he said. "It takes into account state appropriations levels. I think it's a pretty fair formula."

Pearce said he has mixed emotions on tuition restraints but agrees that it is an important issue.

"They sound good on the onset," Pearce said. "But I think caps in the long run put a straitjacket on our board of governors for the university."

Pearce said the tuition should be tied to the Higher Education Price Index rather than the Consumer Price Index. Because the HEPI is higher, this would result in lower tuitions."

Graham said in floor debate that tuition caps would leave universities in Missouri helpless to make decisions.

Representatives are attempting the keep the bill the same as the Senate version, so if it passes, it would go directly to Blunt for signing, Bearden said.

"My objective is to keep it clean," he said. "To do anything less would jeopardize the bill with the difficulties the Senate had."

Pearce said one change to the bill would force it back to the Senate and start the entire process over.

"The pressure is not to make any changes," he said.

Harris said he thinks proponents of the bill would employ maneuvers to ensure no amendments are made to the bill.

"They could shut down debate and rule amendments out of order," Harris said. "I think they'll probably resort to those types of games."

(C) 2007 The Maneater via U-WIRE