Administrative cost is certainly part of it. That’s not just higher salaries, but the size of administrations as more positions are added to fill different roles. But honestly that’s not even the biggest factor, especially for these small to mid size private schools that are on the chopping block. Those administrators aren’t making millions.

The biggest factor as another commenter already pointed out is the elimination or reduction of state support, shifting the burden to the student. You may ask how this applies to private schools. True, they have never received operational support like public universities. But they have historically received state funded research grants, tax exemptions, subsidies, land, etc., not to mention the students who receive government funded tuition grants. All of that government support has been reduced or eliminated over the years, and the burden has shifted to the student.

Another huge factor is the fact that there is no bankruptcy for student loans. This means lenders have no problem lending ridiculous amounts of money to kids who can’t even legally buy a beer. When there’s no limit to how much can be borrowed, it incentivizes schools to raise the cost simply because they can.

A huge factor that isn’t discussed openly very often is the fact that higher tuition allows schools to shape their student body the way they want. They can offer assistance to the students they want most that way and weed out unremarkable ones. They can attract some of the best and brightest, and the rest of the students are basically footing the bill for them.

Another big factor is the campus expansion and renovation projects that are constantly happening to attract students. The infamous “lazy river” projects and other luxuries designed to attract students so they can compete with other schools but drive up the price tag. State of the art stadiums, gyms, dining, maker spaces, etc. all costs money. The amenities that are standard today would never have been dreamed of 25 years ago.

Anyway, these are some of the ones off the top of my head. I know there’s more. Yes administrative cost is part of it, and yes you should be mad that the tuition is so out of control, but to boil it down to greedy administrators doesn’t really capture the majority of the problem.

I don’t disagree, but the article isn’t talking about for-profit universities. Private and for-profit are not the same thing (though it doesn’t go out of its way to point out the difference). Most private universities in the US are nonprofit. From the article:

There are about 3,700 two- and four-year public and private degree-granting colleges and universities in the United States. That’s already down from a peak of 4,726 in 2012. Almost all that have closed since then were private, for-profit schools, which enjoyed a brief boom before crashing under the weight of consumer discontent and increased regulation.

Many converging reasons explain why private, nonprofit colleges and universities, too, are now under existential strain.

None of that changes the fact that tuition is so absurdly out of control that it certainly feels like a scam. There are a ton of reasons for these rising costs. But for most schools, profit actually isn’t the reason.

Is this epic fury?

I hear this a lot, and part of me understands the sentiment. But it’s important to keep in mind that these are state level politicians, not national. Representing their districts is a part time job. Most of them have jobs like attorney, doctor, business owner employing other people, etc. To stay absent would mean not only leaving these responsibilities, but it’s also leaving their spouses and kids. On top of that the state government started imposing $500/day fines. Then they sued and froze the accounts of Beto O’Rourke’s fundraiser to help them meet their expenses (that was just overturned by a judge this afternoon).

When it became clear that other states were willing to redraw their maps to cancel out Texas’s naked power grab, it changed the calculus. They achieved the objective of drawing attention to the issue and they got other states to commit to action so that even if Texas redraws the map, it won’t matter on a national level. They’ve already paid significant personal cost. How much should they be expected to pay? Should their families/clients/patients/employees also suffer?

I don’t know that there’s a right answer. Maybe this is the sort of tough call that defines real rebellions from performative ones. I do think that it’s easy to criticize from a distance because for most of us the principles and ideas are abstract. But for them the costs are already being felt in concrete ways.