During his tenure as Governor of Louisiana, for the last six consecutive years, Bobby Jindal and his allies in the Louisiana legislature have dramatically cut funding for higher education. All told, Louisiana’s public colleges and universities have lost around $700 million (or 17.6%) of state funding. To put that into context, this means that Louisiana, under Governor Jindal, is now leading the nation, by far, in gutting funding for higher education. Quoting from The Times-Picayune (bold mine):

According to preliminary data from the American Association of Colleges and Universities, three-quarters of states increased their funding for higher education this year, with New Hampshire leading the pack with a 28 percent boost in state funding to offset recent cuts.


Louisiana was one of only seven states bucking the trend, however, by slashing state funding for higher education by 17.6 percent in the fiscal year that began in July. The most recent cuts were the most drastic in the nation, the data showed, with West Virginia coming in a distant second at 8.9 percent in cuts.


Louisiana has undergone six straight years of higher ed cuts, with nearly $700 million in state money slated to go to colleges and universities stripped from the budget since 2008. Tuition increases allowed for institutions that reached certain benchmarks were whitewashed by these cuts.

In other words, to make up the difference, Louisiana’s public colleges and universities have been forced to substantially increase tuition (and thereby substantially decrease the affordability and accessibility of public higher education in what is, already, one of the poorest states in the nation).

Representative John Bel Edwards, a candidate for next year’s gubernatorial election, has compared these tuition hikes to a tax increase on the poor and working class, and while these increases may not technically meet the legal definition of a “tax,” Representative Edwards’s comparison is still appropriate. Quoting from The Advocate (bold mine):

Edwards said the trend in recent years has been for lawmakers to look at the dollar amount schools raise tuition, then take as much as double that same amount of state funding away from the schools — essentially making the tuition hikes moot.

Therefore, tuition increases should be considered tax increases, he argued.

Edwards explained his reasoning by saying that if tuition were a fee, schools would reap some benefit from raising prices.

A fee, he said, generates revenue for the agency that collects it. But that’s not the case in this state, he said.

“With all the tuition increases, how come we have not netted a single new dollar,” Edwards said. “That’s a tax increase on our students.”

However, Kyle Plotkin, the spokesman for Governor Bobby Jindal, apparently believes that the increased tuition should count as “state spending,” despite the fact that it is being paid entirely by students, parents, and families. Again, from The Times-Picayune (bold mine): “‘When looking at total means of finance, spending for higher education has gone down by 4.6 percent, but at the same time, student outcomes are on the rise,’ Plotkin said.”

Put more simply: We are making public education less affordable and less accessible to the poor and middle class, and then pretending as if marginal improvements in graduation rates somehow demonstrate that the system now performs better.

It’s insulting, cynical, and shameful, and it’s a prime example of Governor Jindal’s approach to education policy in general: This is not really about improving academic performance; it’s about defunding public institutions in order to manipulate the data. If he can convince the parents of the smartest and most ambitious students attending public elementary and secondary schools to walk away, en masse, from struggling public schools and, instead, use a taxpayer-funded voucher to subsidize their education at a private school, he may be able to, eventually, improve outcomes at these voucher schools, the overwhelming majority of which are unregulated and unaccountable. Meanwhile, Louisiana’s struggling public schools will continue to struggle even more. It’s a fait accompli. And if he can disincentivize poor and middle class students from attending public higher education institutions by making it less accessible and affordable, he can ensure that those schools are primarily populated by students who, for a variety of reasons, are already privileged.

But it didn’t and it doesn’t have to be like this.

Five years ago, Governor Jindal refused to accept $584 million in federal stimulus funds that could have been spent on Louisiana higher education. That is, 84% of the cuts Bobby Jindal made to higher education could have been avoided if he were simply more interested in serving and protecting the people of Louisiana than he is in scoring cheap, fleeting political points for a national audience that consumes its news in scripted infotainment.

Currently, Louisiana has more than 440 tax exemptions, and according to Eddie Ashworth, the President of the Louisiana Budget Project, those exemptions deplete the state of more than $7.1 billion in lost revenue. Contrary to what Governor Jindal and his allies claim, Louisiana is not constitutionally obligated to balance its budget every year simply by cutting funding for education and health care. Instead of decimating public institutions, we could eliminate tax exemptions that we provide to the richest and most profitable companies in the entire world, but for some reason, it’s easier to blame teacher’s unions and Medicaid patients than it is to stand up to corporate lobbyists representing an industry responsible for the worst environmental disaster in American history, the destruction of our coast, and the pilfering of hundreds of billions in profits from our shared natural resources to a small group of people in Texas, Saudi Arabia, and the UK.


There is another part of this story, and it’s equally as important.

Without question, Governor Jindal’s draconian cuts to higher education have forced many of our public institutions to do whatever they can to ensure their sustainability, even if it requires them to disingenuously oppose and undermine other community and educational development initiatives.

During the last legislative session, Governor Bobby Jindal signed Senate Bill 204, which authorized the Louisiana Community and Technical College System (LCTCS) the ability to issue up to $250 million in bonds for capital projects. And as terrible and awful as I believe Governor Jindal has been toward education, I, nonetheless, should give credit when credit is due: Louisiana’s community college system has been woefully and disastrously neglected, and despite the vocal opposition of leaders in higher education, this bill was a no-brainer.

Some may disagree with me, but I think my position is consistent: I believe Louisiana needs to increase investments in all public education systems and institutions, and community colleges serve a distinct and separate role from four-year baccalaureate programs.

I also strongly believe that government investment in essential infrastructure, if done properly and strategically, yields exponentially higher returns to taxpayers than anything other than scientific and medical research. Our neighborhoods are built around our schools, and our downtowns are built around our city halls and our courthouses.

Senate Bill 204 provided my hometown, Alexandria, with more than $20 million to build a brand-new community college campus, but one of the requirements of the law is that the private-sector or an entity other than the state government matches at least 10%.

Alexandria desperately needs a more robust and more modern community and technical college campus. It needs a campus that is accessible and centrally-located. Students need to be able to walk or ride their bicycles or hop on a city bus to go to school, and considering Alexandria is already a small city, it shouldn’t be unreasonable for them to expect to be on campus within five minutes. A community college should, by its very definition, be a part of its community.

Fortunately, there is a simple and obvious site for this future campus: Downtown Alexandria. With a $20+ million investment, a community college could transform Downtown Alexandria overnight. But it wouldn’t just be catalytic for Downtown, it’d be the single largest investment in public infrastructure (which would be matched by at least 10% from the private-sector) in Alexandria since the Versailles road expansion project, which has opened up at least $250 million in private investment opportunities.

There’s only one problem: Louisiana State University at Alexandria (LSUA) wants that money too, and they’re also bidding for the community college.


I’m not going to pull any punches here: I love the people at LSUA. My mother is an LSUA graduate. My Aunt Sue Eakin worked there for much of her career and bequeathed her entire archive (which I believe is valued at around $300,000) to LSUA. And I know other members of my family have done even more to support LSUA, though I’d prefer not to publicize their charity.

If you’re not from Alexandria, you may be under the impression that LSUA, as its name suggests, is in Alexandria. It’s not. It’s 10 or 15 miles away, out in the country, and its nickname is “the farm.” I don’t blame anyone in particular for the fact that LSUA is, in my personal opinion, stupidly located. I fully understand that back in the 1960s, when it was founded, cheap farmland in the country made more economic sense, and I suppose some people were convinced that the city would eventually come to them. But it never did, and it never will. And, after finally recognizing this, LSUA has spent the last twenty years attempting to correct the mistake of its poor location: Building generic student housing, incentivizing a couple of cheap restaurants, marketing a golf course.

LSUA needs to make a decision: It needs to either fully embrace itself as a four-year undergraduate institution, or its leadership and those responsible for pushing through the four-year program need to write letters of apology to each and every elected official who opposed their expansion.

For the first time in over a generation, Alexandria has the opportunity to expand its community college in its actual community, and ironically, the only people standing in the way are those who insisted LSUA was not and would never again be defined as a “community college.” I’ve reviewed LSUA’s proposal, and essentially, it is merely offering publicly-owned facilities to the public; that’s not a real proposal for a “community college,” though. It is nothing more than a plea for the state to spend more than $20 million on a community college in the countryside.

And that’s not fair to Alexandria. It’s not fair for community college students. It misses the point, and to me, it looks like a money grab from the very people opposed to a community college in the first place.

For once, I hope we can be smart about our investments in infrastructure, because, ultimately, the goal is to build together.

7 thoughts

  1. You are right-on about this Lamar. There is no logical reason to place a “community” college on the campus of another college that is minimally accessible.

  2. I’m not sure I can validly comment on LSUA considering I basically grew up on it’s campus and my father worked in the administration for more than a decade (admittedly, I’m pretty emotionally attached to the school), but I think there is more to a community college than just its location. When my Dad worked for LSUA, they were tied into the community, despite the distance from the city limits. They met with city officials and businesses to determine their needs, as well as those of the students. The push to offer four-year degrees was more than a glory grab for the university; it was an attempt to provide something that the community needed, a public four-year college that could provide current and future businesses human capital with bachelor’s degrees. At any rate, I think you might be setting up a bit of a false dichotomy between a “community college” and a “4-year university.” Why couldn’t money be used to expand an LSUA downtown satellite campus (which I think has already been done to some degree) or improving transportation options for students, such as a dedicated bus route from the inner city directly to the rural campus? I fully grant that perspectives within LSUA may have shifted since my father left and that I’m no longer plugged into the administration’s social network, but I don’t know of any structural reasons that make it impossible for LSUA to provide bachelor’s degrees and continue its close relationship with the Alexandria and CENLA community.

  3. Lamar. LSUA is not “10 or 15 miles” from Alexandria. It’s 4.5 miles away from Exit 80 of I-49 which is at the city line. It’s 10 miles from the Bentley to the Chambers campus. I agree that Chambers is not the ideal location for the technical community college, but the good folks in Avoyelles Parish (a part of our community) might disagree.

    What is your fascination with the downtown location? Wouldn’t parking be a challenge there? You claim LSUA is trying to make a money grab. Is this not the case with a few developers who hold downtown real estate and would love to unload it at a price well above what the market will bear right now? Why should the community around the current location of the technical community college on MacArthur be robbed of the institution in favor of downtown? It seems to me that the old Central is an even better location – a beautiful setting with plenty of room close – with the new OK Allen bridge – to the downtown area, the booming 28 West area, and of course the growing Pineville area.

    LSUA will have new leadership in a couple of months, and I think you’ll be pleased. Most on campus really do want the institution to blossom as a university – and for the technical community college to do well too. It would be great for Central Louisiana.

    Please don’t write 71 South off. I think you’ll see expansion there in the coming years. Your claim that this will never happen seems a bit harsh. Where do you think the university should be located?

    1. Henry, I hope you are right about LSUA’s new leadership, because I cannot understand, at all, why the current administration would submit this proposal. My only conclusion is that they simply need the money, and the plan for another building was already sitting on a shelf. I like Downtown Alexandria as a location because I think it would be catalytic and accessible. I don’t think parking is or has ever been a real problem. It’s Downtown Alexandria, not the French Quarter. (For what it’s worth, I’ve done a good bit of analysis on parking in Downtown Alexandria, and it is absolutely not an issue for the proposed location of the community college, at all). Also, I know the people who own these properties downtown; they are good people who have invested their own money in our community. They aren’t playing with “fake” money.

      Let’s invest our precious dollars wisely. Let’s put money where it can create and sustain the most value for the most people. Let’s invest in our actual community. (No offense, but the old Central hospital location makes even less sense than LSUA).

      Finally, I stand by my statement that LSUA is 10-15 miles away from Alexandria, because it is.

      Thanks for your comment.

      1. Lamar, did you know that the technical community college system has sent out a request for proposals for the location? LSUA and others are submitting proposals. I wonder if England Airpark will submit one too. I think competition is good. Let’s hope the best possible location is selected. The farthest point in Alexandria from LSUA (via existing roadways) is 17 miles. The closest point in Alexandria to LSUA (again along existing roadways) is around four miles. As the bird flies these long and short distances are about 13 and four miles, respectively. Thanks for blogging on this issue. It deserves debate.

    2. I think that hosting a Community College at LSUA just to keep the Avoyelles folks happy would be ludicrous. We are talking about a Community College in Alexandria, in Rapides Parish, and that population should be the main focus when considering where to place the CC. In my opinion. LSUA can still serve the find Avoyelles folks, but Alexandria proper really needs a CC within city limits and centrally located.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s