4 - The Michigan Daily - Wednesday, July 16, 1997 Edited and managed by ERIN MARSH JACK SCHILLACI students at the Editor in Chief Editorial Page Editor 31 University of Michigan Unnvers otherwise noted, uigned editorials re/lect the opinio 420 Maynard Street niiajrity of die Dain edioial hoan. All oher ardclesieei Ann Arbor, MI 48109 cartoons (o not neeiard), iefleti the df inion of TheA MichignLi D B udgets get tighter, checking accounts get smaller and plans for retirement move back a few more months. The July University Board of Regents meeting marks the annual discussion of the University's budget for the 1997-98 acade- mic year. Along with the budget comes the inevitable question: How much will the regents augment tuition? The University's healthy economic picture allows for a minor increase. In previous years, a signif- icant drop in the severity of tuition increases occurred - a pattern the regents should continue. The University has vast educational resources - high tuition and fees can block qualified students from accessing them. The University should remain com- mitted to providing the best education to a diverse array of applicants - not just those who can afford the exorbitant price tag. The regents should keep in mind the quality of the University's student body hedges on their ability to make tuition a feasible expense. Tpuo ioa sn Tuition increase should remain low The government founds its' annual inflation rate on the Consumer Price Index, which compares the prices of cer- tain goods and services against their costs in previous years. The University previ- ously used its own mechanism to calculate annual interest rate, claiming that interest rises faster in a university setting than in CPI's model. However, the students and families paying tuition are more likely to see income increases in line with CPI - by increasing tuition using its own mecha- nism, the University overtaxes students' financial resources. By following CPI, the regents could ensure that the tuition increase followed students' budget changes more closely - creating a greater opportunity for access to the University. The University is not in sore need for a financial boost from student dollars. Last year's low tuition increase followed a sig- nificant state appropriation. This year's appropriation weighed in at $314 million - an improvement over even last year's large numbers. In addition, last year's appropriation contained a rider that that prevented the University from receiving its full appropriation due to its extension of health benefits to employees' same-sex partners. State Attorney General Frank Kelley decided earlier this year that the rider violated the University's autonomy from the state - further augmenting the University's coffers. The Campaign for Michigan - a fundraising drive that surpassed its $1 bil- lion goal more than a year ago - also aids the University's economic picture. With contributions coming from the state alumni, a large tuition hike would unnecessary - the regents should m tuition as manageable as possible. Last year's primary tuition pr4 came from University Provost J. Bert Machen. His proposal included a 3- cent increase for in-state residents an percent for out-of-state students. Office of the Provost should again wor create a budget proposal that aids dents' concerns. The regents face a grueling task Thursday. Managing the budget fc multi-billion dollar goliath like University is no easy task - bu must address University students' to Given the University's financial w being, there is no reason for the regf not to make a mild tuition increase in with the CPI inflation rate. The reg( should work to make tuition manage; for students' and parents' bank accoi and in so doing, enhance the Univer community. School dimes Funding will benefit special education In one budgetary swoop, Gov. John additional sigh of relief once the current Engler has a chance to reverse his long- funding session passes. Earlier this year, standing abuse of Michigan's public many districts - including a number in schools. The school-funding package the metro Detroit area - were unpleas- passed by the state House and Senate last antly surprised by an announcement from week delivers substantially more money to the governor's office. Citing declining schools in the wake of a Michigan standardized-test scores, Engler unveiled Supreme Court decision favoring local a plan that would wrest control of acade- districts. However, the debate surrounding mic and administrative matters from school funding may be more remarkable school districts beset by poor test perfor- for proposals left on the cutting-room mance. At the time, the proposal was slat- floor. ed for inclusion along with the funding Monetarily, the state legislature allo- issue, but it encountered heavy opposi- cated nearly $650 million more to public tion. School officials were joined in schools for the next fiscal year. Much of protest by Democratic and Republican this increase goes toward special-educa- lawmakers alike, who felt Engler's pro- tion funding. Under an amendment to posal inappropriate for the current Michigan's Constitution, the state must debate. pay a certain share of costs for programs Some hinted, however, under different it mandates that local schools provide, circumstances, they might agree with including special-education programs. Engler's proposal. Engler may believe that Last month, the state Supreme Court having hand-picked lieutenants in Lansing ruled that the state had consistently controlling low-achieving school districts underpaid its share of costs for the last 17 is the best solution for low test scores, but years, a major victory for public school his solution ignores the side effects such a districts. take-over might have on these school dis- While recompense for past funding tricts. Communities surrounding school shortfalls have yet to be determined, state districts are best suited to select its admin- lawmakers moved quickly to ascertain the istrators and guide its policy decisions. state does not fail its students again. Regardless of the state's success, once Ditching a complex, formulaic approach control passed back to the communities, to special-education funding, they voted districts would be returned to local hands for an overall $752 million increase. out of touch with the district's day-to-day Although opponents charge supporters administration. While Lansing is ultimate- with playing an economic shell game - ly responsible for the state's public diverting funds already earmarked for schools, it should not have control over public school to specifically pay for spe- small portions of the system. cial education - the gesture is necessary. Given adequate funding, students' per- Regardless of the path taken, school dis- formance in these districts will improve tricts will welcome every funding increase without state intervention. Engler must they get. permanently retire his blueprint for educa- Several districts will also emit an tional disaster, Ineffective insulation' TV-rating system does not protect childrei L ast Wednesday, many television net- and First Amendment freedoms that works surrendered to family advocacy work programming deserves could groups in a settlement to upgrade the cur- jeopardized. rent television-rating system that has been Vice President Al Gore excitedly in effect since January. Though the cussed how the changes would granq arrangement was voluntary, the networks ents control over their televisions. In caved into a compromise - possibly to of the nuclear family gathering to wa get some peace from legislative pressure television is outdated. Even with a r and a hailstorm of criticism from parents' rating system, working parents fight a I groups. Instating a rating format may ing battle with their TV sets. Ratings seem to be a positive step, but it is misdi- only a misleading comfort device. rected, ineffective and could easily be mis- Families should not rely on the rati; used. system to guide their children - it is During a three-year trial run starting in an adequate tool to discriminate betw October, shows will carry an age-group good and bad television. High-qual distinction and content ratings of 'V,' 'S,' shows that utilize violence may be nI ' or 'D' - indicating violence, sexual with the same ratings that poorer-qua: content, coarse language and suggestive ones would receive. Consequently, dialogue. Children's shows and popular new system promotes a false security t cartoons could also receive an 'FV' rating children are exposed to "better" televisi for depicting consequence-free fantasy Parents should take responsibility for w violence. The previous system rated pro- their children watch by taking time to a grams according to their estimated age- cuss programs with their children or wa appropriateness. However, rating a pro- with them. They should not abuse the I gram for a 14-year-old belies the fact that ing system as a way to justify televisior children mature at different rates - some a babysitter - there is no substitute ft may be able to understand adult themes or parent's role. the consequences of violence at younger Developing a rating system in host ages. The new system is more explicit than improving the quality of television p its predecessor; it rates content rather than grams is like firing at a target without ai relying on subjective evaluations of matu- ing. Ratings cannot - and should not rity. However, vestiges of the old system's change television. What they probably v problems still exist. so is make parents believe their child One of the networks' main concerns is are insulated from televised violence a the likelihood that politicians and advertis- sexual content. Assigning a program a ] ers could misuse the new rating system ter-rating does nothing to determine cl and dictate television programming. dren's emotional readiness to handP1 Members of Congress have already pro- underlying themes - that must be 1 posed bills to dedicate certain hours exclu- their parents. Relying on television r sively to "family shows" and to dictate that ings to protect children will not work shows with a violence rating are aired only parents must invest time to ensure t after 10 p.m. In this position, the liberties children understand what they watch.