In an interview, Tim Eller, spokesman for the state Education Department, was asked whether money for higher education would continue to dwindle or even potentially end.
"I don't want to take that leap just yet," he said. "It all depends on the economy and the revenues coming in to the state treasury. The governor just feels at this time we have to live within our means without asking taxpayers to pay more."
The cuts, however, ensure that some taxpayers - students and their families - will definitely pay more.
"What it means is higher tuition," said Joni Finney, vice president of the National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education and a professor at the University of Pennsylvania. "Not enough states are really figuring out what we need, and then stepping back and figuring out how do we pay for it. What's the state's share? What's the student's share? It just seems to me that's really critical before cutting another 20 percent."
One state that's found at least a partial solution is Maryland.
In 2003, faced with rising costs and falling state aid, the University System of Maryland created what it called the "Effectiveness and Efficiency Initiative."
The system's goal was to pay less for what it needed and get more from what it had. Faculty teaching, advising, and office hours were raised 20 percent. Bulk purchasing and services such as energy were centralized.
All told, the Maryland system saved a total of $255 million. It kept tuition flat for four out of five years.
"These weren't cuts that impacted quality," said William "Brit" Kirwan, chancellor of the 12-campus system. "It was streamlining to make ourselves more efficient."
