UT System’s “Free Tuition” Program Faces Scrutiny from Texas Lawmakers

Estimated Time to Read: 7 minutes

In a controversial decision, the University of Texas (UT) System announced a program offering “free” tuition for undergraduate students whose families earn up to $100,000 annually. The initiative has been celebrated as a step forward in higher education accessibility. However, several current and incoming Texas state lawmakers have raised significant concerns about the program’s financial implications, legality, and broader impact on taxpayers and students.

On November 21, 2024, lawmakers submitted a formal letter to the UT System’s Board of Regents outlining these concerns. Below, we explore the primary issues raised and the potential ramifications of this initiative.

Brief Background

In November 2024, the University of Texas (UT) System Board of Regents approved a significant expansion of the “Promise Plus” program, aiming to enhance college affordability for Texas students. This initiative offers tuition-free education to in-state undergraduate students across nine UT academic institutions whose families have an adjusted gross income (AGI) of $100,000 or less, effective from the upcoming fall semester.

To support this expansion, the Regents allocated an immediate $35 million to the campuses. Additionally, they increased investments in endowments dedicated to financial aid in an attempt to ensure the program’s sustainability in the future.

The University of Texas Board of Regents Chairman, Kevin Eltife, who also happens to be a former Republican Texas State Senator, said this in a statement:

The announcement came just a week after Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) sent a letter to Texas public university system chairmen and chancellors, urging them to prevent tuition increases, continuing a tuition freeze implemented in 2023.

Historical Context and Previous Initiatives

The “Promise Plus” program builds upon earlier efforts to make higher education more accessible. In 2019, the Regents established a $167 million endowment at the University of Texas at Austin, covering tuition and mandatory fees for in-state undergraduates from families with an AGI up to $65,000 and providing substantial support for those earning up to $125,000. In 2022, they expanded this model system-wide with an additional endowment of nearly $300 million, collectively known as “Promise Plus,” supplementing existing financial aid programs to assist more need-based students.

Who Signed the Letter?

The letter was signed by both current and incoming Texas state lawmakers:

Key Concerns Raised by Lawmakers

The following were the key concerns raised by lawmakers who signed on to the letter:

Statutory Authority and Funding Sources

One of the lawmakers’ central questions revolves around the statutory authority that allowed the UT System Regents to implement this policy. They argue that decisions of this magnitude, which have direct financial consequences, should involve legislative oversight.

Additionally, the lawmakers demand clarity on funding sources for the program, asking whether the funds will come from taxpayer dollars or internal reallocations within the UT System. This is especially pressing given the program’s potential cost and the existing pressures on Texas taxpayers.

Equity and Eligibility

Lawmakers also raised concerns about equity in eligibility criteria. The letter highlights several scenarios, such as whether students from high-net-worth families who technically earn under $100,000 annually might qualify, or whether the program would extend to students enrolled in controversial academic programs like the “LGBTQ/Sexualities Studies” minor.

Impact on Non-Qualifying Students

Another key question involves the potential downstream effects on students who do not qualify for the program. Lawmakers warn that the policy could lead to tuition hikes for non-qualifying students, creating an inflationary ripple effect that further strains affordability.

Broader Economic Impacts

The letter emphasizes the potential economic consequences of the program, including how it could depress wages in competitive job markets. Lawmakers argue that offering free tuition might disincentivize graduates from pursuing higher-paying jobs, knowing that a portion of their salaries might subsidize similar programs in the future.

Constitutional and Legal Issues

Comparisons were made to Biden’s federal student loan forgiveness program, recently struck down by the courts as unconstitutional. The lawmakers question whether UT’s tuition reimbursement program could face similar legal challenges, given its reliance on significant state resources.

Reactions and Discussion

Many lawmakers and policy experts took to social media to explain their support or opposition to such a policy change:

State Rep. Brian Harrison (R-Midlothian), a signer of the letter, said the following:

State Rep. Donna Howard (D-Austin) replied:

Vance Ginn, a Ph.D. economist and Texas Policy Research board member chimed in:

Critiques of the “Free” Tuition Narrative and Calls for Transparency

The lawmakers’ letter challenges the notion that the program is truly “free.” They argue that the funds to support such initiatives come from taxpayers or reallocated UT System resources, effectively burdening other Texans. The letter questions whether “free” is an appropriate descriptor in UT System marketing materials, as it misrepresents the true cost of the program.

The letter calls for full transparency from the UT System Regents. Among the lawmakers’ most provocative questions is whether the program’s approval indicates that the UT System is overfunded. If so, they suggest that legislative funding should be reevaluated in the next budget cycle.

Conclusion

The UT System’s decision to provide tuition relief for families earning under $100,000 has ignited a heated debate about the role of public universities, the proper use of taxpayer funds, and the long-term impact on affordability and equity in higher education.

The questions raised by Texas lawmakers underscore the need for greater clarity and accountability in the program’s implementation. As the debate unfolds, it will be essential for the UT System to address these concerns while balancing the competing priorities of accessibility, equity, and fiscal responsibility.

Texas Policy Research relies on the support of generous donors across Texas.
If you found this information helpful, please consider supporting our efforts! Thank you!