<p>[The</a> Problem With In-State Tuition - Commentary - The Chronicle of Higher Education](<a href=“The Problem With In-State Tuition”>The Problem With In-State Tuition)</p>
<p>That argument has been made for a long time. As in the link above, it makes sense to the academics at the state university (which would get more money and which would therefore be able to increase salaries to professors). The argument doesn’t make sense to in-state parents, at least not until their kid graduates. </p>
<p>I wonder how many of the demonstrators last year (other than the tenured profs) understood that TS’s agenda was to keep things at UVA operationally status quo. Which means you take in more money by getting rid of (i) in-state tuition and (ii) many in-staters. I don’t think that was Dragas’ agenda.</p>
<p>TS’s dream won’t happen because of politics. But a great example of “be careful what you wish for.”</p>
<p>[To be fair, though, TS would charge all students $40k in tuition. But would not object if the Commonwealth decided to re-purpose the foregone state aid into a voucher or financial aid directed at in-state students.]</p>