Tuition increases and layoffs are coming to a broad set of universities
Students and employees from coast to coast are poised to feel the squeeze. Although the exact consequences will vary by school, administrators are warning that many students may have to pay more, professors may lose their jobs, programs could vanish and support services could shrink.
Get Starting Point
A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday.
Enter Email
Sign Up
The turmoil is not limited to any one type of university or college, or any one state. A day before Michigan State University trustees opted for tuition increases, a California State University campus minutes from the Pacific Ocean announced that it was trimming its workforce.
Advertisement
'If you're a student or family looking to go to college this year, all of the numbers are going in the wrong direction,' said Ted Mitchell, president of the American Council on Education, who described the mood among higher education leaders as 'dark but resolved.'
The Trump administration's efforts to reduce research funding are siphoning cash from many campuses, sometimes by hundreds of millions of dollars. But that is just one factor contributing to higher education's financial crunch. Colleges, like businesses and households, are facing greater costs for wages, supplies, utilities and other expenses.
Advertisement
Their income sources are not always keeping pace. In Nebraska, the state government's contribution to the university system will rise roughly 0.6%, far below the 3.5% increase that the Board of Regents had sought to account for inflation. But regents saw the increase as a modest victory.
Gov. Jim Pillen, a Republican who wanted the state to have 'the courage to say no, and to focus on needs, not wants,' had originally urged a 2% reduction.
'We will need to continue to reduce spending and make increasingly difficult choices to ensure fiscal discipline,' Jeffrey P. Gold, the University of Nebraska's president, told regents before a vote Thursday to impose cuts and increase tuition. Students who enroll at the flagship campus in Lincoln are poised to pay about 5% more.
In neighboring Kansas, only one of the state's six public universities did not propose a tuition increase for the coming school year. And University of Oklahoma leaders just raised tuition again, too.
The White House rejected accusations from some college administrators that the federal government is partly to blame for tuition increases and other budget moves.
'Any school that scapegoats the administration's policies of cutting waste, fraud and abuse to justify raising already astronomical tuition costs is failing American students in an effort to score political points and fatten its coffers,' Harrison Fields, a White House spokesperson, said in a statement.
He added: 'If these higher education institutions were serious about lowering costs, they would cut the bloated salaries of their faculty and stop wasting money on useless programs that do little to advance education.'
Advertisement
Some schools are more reliant than others on federal money, especially research institutions, and leaders on many of those campuses have cited the administration's tactics as they have reworked their budgets. But public institutions are also sometimes facing significant resistance in statehouses, and recent rises in inflation have put new demands on campus finances.
College leaders across the country have sometimes sought to defend new tuition increases by noting correctly that their prices had stayed relatively steady in recent years. Others point to the number of scholarships and grants they offer, which routinely drive costs well south of the sticker price, and say that many students are ultimately paying less than in the past.
In Minnesota, students are set to pay more for less.
State leaders maintained stable support for the University of Minnesota -- a decision that university officials considered an effective budget cut, given inflation. And questions are swirling over how much additional declines in federal money could worsen the university's financial outlook.
Tuition at the Twin Cities campus will rise by at least 6.5%. But the university is also pursuing cuts of 7%. Academic units have been asked to come up with millions of dollars in 'reallocations' that could lead to program changes and fewer materials in the Law Library, among other things. More than 350 jobs could be eliminated.
'Making these kinds of cuts here is new to us in Minnesota,' Rebecca Cunningham, the university's president, said during a board meeting Wednesday. 'It is unfortunate, but indeed we are not alone.'
They are not. The University System of Maryland's chancellor, Jay A. Perman, bluntly told employees in a video this month that the schools would absorb a 7% cut for the coming fiscal year.
Advertisement
'A 7% cut simply can't be achieved on every campus in a way that doesn't touch any of our people,' Perman said.
Private universities often say far less about their finances than public institutions, but similar signs of immense strain are emerging.
Duke University is seeking about $350 million in cuts, amounting to roughly 10% of its budget. In a video message this month, Duke's president, Vincent E. Price, said the university was trying to sort out proposals from the federal government 'that have quite dire implications for the university.'
He added there was 'sadly, no scenario in which Duke can or will avoid incurring substantial losses of funding due to these policy changes.'
The university has imposed a hiring freeze and developed buyout plans, but Price said that Duke would 'likely' resort to layoffs.
The school is among the wealthy universities that could face a higher endowment tax under a Republican plan working its way through Congress. Many schools that would be hit hardest were already reeling.
Harvard University, which has clashed bitterly with the Trump administration, is urgently seeking contributions from donors and has been making cuts, partly because billions of dollars in its endowment have restricted uses. And in a statement Wednesday ominously titled 'a message on financial austerity,' leaders at Cornell, which also has a substantial endowment, described a dire landscape.
'The spring semester was unlike anything ever seen in higher education,' school officials wrote, noting, among a long list of federal cuts, the burden of rising inflation along with 'rapidly escalating legal expenses.'
Advertisement
To manage the financial pressures, school leaders said they 'anticipate involuntary reductions in head count.'
This article originally appeared in The New York Times.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
39 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump's Vetting Official Hasn't Been Fully Vetted for His Own Security Clearance
President Donald Trump's man in charge of vetting staff has not yet been fully vetted himself for a security clearance five months into the second Trump administration. Sergio Gor is the director of the White House Office of Presidential Personnel. He is tasked with vetting thousands of executive branch employees. However, Gor has not yet submitted paperwork on his own background for a permanent clearance, according to a report from the New York Post which cited multiple sources. Gor's office is responsible for assessing candidates for approximately 4,000 political appointees including recruiting and screening candidates as well as dealing with security clearances and conflicts of interests. Some 1,600 of the positions require Senate confirmation. The powerful Trump aide has yet to turn in his Standard Form 86, or SF-86, the more than 100-page background investigation form required for a security clearance, three administration sources said. The extensive form covers citizenship, employment history, relatives, foreign contacts and travel, financial activities, drug use and more. Gor, 38, is reportedly from Malta. However, an official there could not confirm his birthplace, and Gor declined to provide it to the Post besides to say it was not Russia. Gor is a close MAGA ally of Trump and his son Don Jr. with whom he co-founded Winning Team Publishing in 2021. The top Trump aide also once worked as a booker for Fox News and as a spokesperson for Sen. Rand Paul. He also served as officiant and DJ at Matt Gaetz's wedding in 2021, according to Vanity Fair. While his work largely takes place behind the scenes at the White House, Gor made headlines earlier this month for being the person behind the move to withdraw Jared Isaacman's nomination to lead NASA and clashing with While he does not have a permanent security clearance, the Trump staffer does have an interim security clearance. Gor opposed the use of the SF-86 during the presidential transition and was concerned with Trump picks being weeded out by the 'deep state.' A source told the Post that he was 'actively working to convince everyone' that the form wasn't necessary and Trump could provide the clearance through executive authority. A White House official claimed Gor had completed the form and noted his interim clearance, which is given while background checks are completed. Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt accused the Post of 'engaging in baseless gossip.' White House counsel David Warrington also told the Post that Gor is 'fully compliant with all applicable ethical and legal security clearance is active, any insinuation he doesn't maintain a clearance is false.'
Yahoo
41 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Musk Savages ‘Snake' Trump Aide as Their White House Feud Erupts
Elon Musk publicly ripped into a top White House aide who fueled his falling out with President Donald Trump. Tensions had already been building between Musk and Trump before the SpaceX chief left the White House. Things got ugly, however, after Sergio Gor, the director of the presidential personnel office, encouraged Trump to rescind his nomination for Jared Isaacman—Musk's personal friend—to lead NASA. The New York Post revealed this week that even though Gor is in charge of vetting thousands of executive branch employees, he himself hasn't been fully vetted. Five months into the second Trump administration, he hasn't even submitted the paperwork for his own permanent security clearance. 'He's a snake,' Musk wrote on his social media platform X late Wednesday in response to the Post's report. According to the Post, Gor, 38, developed a grudge against Musk, 53, after the Tesla chief—who as head of the government cost-cutting task force DOGE was a de facto member of Trump's Cabinet—'humiliated' him in front of other Cabinet members for not staffing the administration quickly enough. 'Sergio was upset about Elon dressing him down at the meeting and said he was going to 'get him,'' a source told the paper. At the time, Musk and Trump were still on friendly terms, but Gor was openly gleeful whenever Tesla stock plunged, according to the report. After Musk's special government employee status expired, forcing him to leave the White House, Gor reportedly got his revenge on Musk by convincing Trump to pull Isaacman's nomination just days before the Senate was scheduled to vote on the appointment. The administration blamed the move on Isaacman's previous donations to Democrats, but the billionaire financial technology executive said he didn't think that was the real reason, considering his donation history had long been in the public domain. After the nomination was pulled, Musk—who poured more than $250 million into the president's re-election campaign—began publicly trying to tank the president's flagship 'big beautiful' budget bill. Surprisingly little is known about Gor, including his birthplace, according to the Post. He declined to tell the paper where he was born, except to say that it wasn't Russia. It's previously been reported that he was born in Malta, but an official there couldn't confirm that information, the paper said. Together with Donald Trump Jr., Gor co-founded a publishing company that published several of Trump's books following the end of President Trump's first term, according to the New York Times. In a statement to the Daily Beast, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said, 'Sergio Gor is a trusted adviser to President Trump and he has played a critical role in helping President Trump staff the most talented administration in history.' Gor's office is responsible for assessing candidates for about 4,000 political appointees, including handling security clearances and conflicts of interest. Gor, however, has yet to turn in Standard Form 86, the 100-page background investigation form required for a security clearance, according to the Post. The form covers citizenship, employment history, relatives, foreign contacts and travel, financial activities, drug use, and more. Despite three sources saying otherwise, a White House official claimed Gor had completed the SF-86 form and noted that he has an interim security clearance, which is given while background checks are completed. Leavitt accused the Post of 'engaging in baseless gossip.'
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Mysterious poll may shape Royals' stadium choice. No one will say where it came from
As Missouri lawmakers weighed an incentives package to keep the Kansas City Chiefs and Royals inside state lines, speculation about polling related to the Royals and Clay County circulated throughout the state Capitol. Top lawmakers involved in the debate, from the Republican bill sponsor to the top Democrat in the state House, have ascribed significance to the mysterious poll, mentioning its existence in legislative hearings, interviews and a press conference over the past several weeks. Any type of polling in Missouri could hold significant weight as the Royals decide whether to stay in the state or move to Kansas. The incentives plan in Missouri requires commitments from local governments and a poll in Clay County could help the team determine whether voters would support some form of tax increase to fund a new stadium in the Northland. Kansas City-area officials contacted by The Star say they heard the polling showed positive results for the likelihood of Clay County voters supporting a new Royals stadium in North Kansas City. But most who spoke with The Star expressed some level of skepticism about it. In interviews, most officials said that they have not actually seen the alleged poll, its full results or who paid for it. While very little has been shared publicly, nearly every official who spoke with The Star, from state lawmakers to a Kansas City councilman to a Clay County commissioner, said they had either heard of it or seen a small portion of its results. Clay County Commissioner Scott Wagner said in an interview that he received the top line results of the poll. However, he would not say who shared it with him, saying only that it didn't come from the Royals and that the poll was not commissioned by the county. 'The top line results that have been shared with us suggest that Clay Countians are very open to the Royals coming,' Wagner said, adding that he hasn't seen finer details about the poll. 'But, as you know, the devil's in the details. And, as was witnessed last year, the details can make or break a question like that.' Revelations about the mysterious poll come after Missouri Gov. Mike Kehoe signed legislation that would allow the state to offer incentives to help pay for up to 50% of new stadiums for the Chiefs and Royals. But neither team has committed to staying amid a competing offer from Kansas that would potentially pay for up to 70% of new stadiums across the state line. The lack of firm commitment will likely put pressure on officials in Kansas City, Jackson County and Clay County to put together additional funding packages for the teams. The required local commitment in the Missouri plan would likely come in the form of a local tax vote, just more than a year after Jackson County voters rejected a similar tax. Rep. Chris Brown, a Kansas City Republican who handled the Missouri bill in the House, was also one of the officials who said he had heard about the poll. Brown, who hails from Clay County, said he would love to see the Royals move to the Northland. 'I have heard that it has been done. I heard that it was favorable,' Brown said. 'I would like to think that is something that people would not just imagine or put that out there, you know, without it being based in some sort of reality.' Brown said he heard that Axiom Strategies, a political campaign firm owned by GOP consultant Jeff Roe, conducted the poll. Representatives from Roe's firm did not respond to requests for comment for this story, but Axiom's involvement would not come as a major surprise. The firm previously managed the local tax vote campaign for the Royals and Chiefs, The Star previously reported. The teams and the campaign did not go out of their way to make it known that Axiom was involved at the time, either. A spokesperson for the Royals also did not respond to a request for comment about the poll. But others who spoke with The Star had heard about the poll as well. Kansas City Councilman Wes Rogers said he has seen a copy of it, but said it was not given to him. Sen. Kurtis Gregory, a Marshall Republican who sponsored the Missouri funding bill, and Sen. Maggie Nurrenbern, a Kansas City Democrat, said they had heard of its existence but have not seen it. 'What I had heard, it (polled) so high that I thought…it was a pretty far stretch, quite frankly,' Nurrenbern said in an interview, adding that she takes every poll with a grain of salt. However, she said that if Clay County decides to put a stadium-funding tax vote on the ballot, 'we can make the case to all of Clay County, northern Clay County as well, that this would be a good investment for our county.' In April, the FOX 4 TV station in Kansas City reported that a Royals poll had been sent out to Clay County residents. While it's unclear if this is the same polling circulating among lawmakers, the station reported that the poll asked if residents would support a half-cent sales tax increase to support a Royals stadium in North Kansas City. If the Royals decide to stay in Missouri, a potential fight over the teams between Kansas City and Clay County could be on the horizon. But, so far, the team has not shared where it would like to build a new stadium. A downtown Kansas City site at Washington Square Park and a spot in North Kansas City in Clay County have both been floated as potential sites in Missouri. But news of a recent real estate deal tied to an Overland Park site in Kansas has also intensified speculation about the Royals' intentions — and their preferred stadium location. It's also unclear when the team plans to make its decision and whether the decision to stay in Missouri would be based on polling in Clay County or Kansas City. Any local tax vote in Missouri would likely come in November at the earliest. The Kansas incentives offer expires at the end of June, which means the team could decide whether to cross state lines by the end of the month. But Kansas could also extend that deadline to give the teams more time to decide. Kansas City Mayor Quinton Lucas is one of the biggest supporters of the Royals moving downtown. When asked whether Lucas was concerned about the polling in Clay County, his spokesperson said that the mayor's 'focus remains on Kansas City's plan and providing the best option for the Royals in Downtown Kansas City.' 'With Missouri state support now secured, Kansas City will continue its work with the Royals to build a robust and responsible development plan,' the spokesperson, Megan Strickland, said in an email. 'The Mayor is committed to leveraging Kansas City's unique experience in large facility development to create the best venue and district for our community, our taxpayers, our future, and our team.' After Kansas and Missouri approved incentives packages for the Chiefs and Royals, officials who spoke with The Star now say they're largely waiting to see where the teams decide to end up. For Wagner, the Clay County commissioner, Clay County would respond if 'something comes our way.' But, 'we're not driving that ship,' he said, the Royals are. 'I have come to learn that anybody who says they know anything doesn't know anything,' Wagner said. 'Because, at the end of the day, there's only one decision-maker and that is the team.'
