Apparently there are also plans to change the loan programs and cap how much students can borrow, so @roethlisburger’s plan to have students borrow in order to pay their income taxes might be out the window as well.
We’re too poor 
There will be no time between looking for another job and filing out welfare papers.
If other posters want to claim that taxing graduate student tuition waivers will meaningfully affect the growth rate of real gdp per capita, then let’s see the economic studies showing this. We shouldn’t assume tax breaks will pay for themselves without evidence.
The Congressional sponsors and advocates justify this tax bill on the premise that tax breaks pay for themselves… without any evidence.
And the evidence of how much more our students will pay is obvious.
The PhD-granting universities which currently have large lectures with TA discussions may change many of them to large lectures with no discussions. For frosh/soph level courses where TAs are still needed (e.g. for labs), there may be greater use of junior/senior undergraduate TAs or adjuncts.
English composition and lower level foreign language courses that must be kept small but are commonly taught by TAs as lead instructors may have to cut back on offerings and/or use more adjuncts.
In other words, expect most PhD-granting universities to have a more “economy class” undergraduate academic experience. Other schools that have few or no PhD student TAs will not be affected as much. Perhaps it may be result in a competitive advantage for high-end LACs.
The TAs also grade and proctor exams. So going to just large lecture with no TAs still doesn’t offset the need for them.
@thumper1, I’ve been looking all over. The references I can find (fewer today, as articles are more focused on the sticking points for some Senators, and so far not ONE Republican Senator is speaking up for higher education) show that it is still only in the House version. It sounds like they may vote as early as tomorrow night, and be in reconciliation on Friday.
I’ve been thinking about this – other benefits that are taxed, like company cars and some club memberships, are optional for the employees (you could turn them down if you didn’t want to pay the tax). But tuition for classes for grad students isn’t optional – you can’t be a PhD student without classes and a tuition cost. This is just a way for Republicans to kick the crap out of “elite universities” – but state universities that aren’t top tier schools get hit hard by this.
So correct me if I’m wrong. The senate will vote on its version of this bill…which is quite different from the house version. Then they will hammer out a final bill…right? Which will have to be in agreement in both houses…right!
And they vote again? Or am I wrong??
One solution would be for universities to admit more in-state residents to their PhD programs or for students to attend grad school where they are a resident. Using the University of Michigan in the LSA and interdepartmental school, I calculated the value of waived tuition for a 6-year PhD, split evenly between classes and candidacy, as $171k for non-residents and $67k for residents. The non-residents would be affected a lot more strongly by this than the residents.
@thumper1 they have to reconcile the two bills unless the House just passes the Senate version.
^and Stanford (where I got my PhD)? The tuition waver there is $$$$$
They’ll set up a joint committee for a compromise bill, but revenue bills are supposed to be initiated in the house.
I contacted my senators and representative today to express my distress with the tax plans as they relate to these proposals. It is something I can do to make a difference!
They reconcile the bill. Unless the House agrees to just accept the Senate bill (that isn’t sounding likely), both chambers will have to vote again on the reconciled version. Then the president signs it. I expect there is no mystery about whether that will happen.
They could hire graduate or senior undergraduate students to do this work, which is less work than that of running discussion sections and other typical TA work, and requires less training.
My kid finds proctoring exams to be one of the hardest parts of being a TA. Maybe because the prof teaching her class is INSANELY picky about how it is done (and readily yells at the TAs who mess it up). (It has helped my kid figure out that this prof, whose lab she was considering joining before she got there, is NOT someone she wants to research under – fortunately there are other – nicer – choices).
So much for the brain gain through immigration of top-end (in terms of education) internationals. But then reducing such immigration may be intended, since many of them are non-European.
The US’ loss will be Canada’s, China’s, and other countries’ gains.
@roethlisburger
That’s not really how PhD programs work. You apply to programs that have to do with your area of research or research that you’re interested in. This may or may not be possible at the institutions in your state.
I’m not sure I would want a lot of the internationals as TAs. Many of them, if they’re not from Europe or a former British colony, come to the US with poor English speaking ability.
^^ I had two of these for Econ 101-102. Didn’t understand a word said in either class.