Maybe Law Schools Are Just For The Kids With Rich Parents

When you read the article by Jeanie Kever in the Houston Chronicle detailing how rising tuition at our colleges is threatening the Texas economy, it has to make you wonder about law schools as well.  After all, the piling on of debt for law school is obviously occurring after students and families have already piled on debt for undergraduate studies.  Debt by and large that is non-dischargeable.  I would think the end result could be devastating.

The National Center on Public Policy and Higher Education has found that high tuition is the biggest barrier to higher education almost everywhere.  49 states received and F on college affordability.  Only California earned a passing grade, and then it got a 'C' only because its community colleges were relatively inexpensive.  I would call this a crises.

Texas, like many states, has been on a tuition increase frenzy for the last 6 years or so.  The doubling of tuition has occurred in this state since the Texas legislature deregulated tuition at public universities for the purpose stealing the education funds to pay for the budget excesses of George Bush while he was governor.  The public and private law schools of Texas have been no different.  Even when universities say they will have only single digit increases in tuition, they raise fees and other costs so that every increase is double digits.  Take UH Law, for example.  Next semester, for an resident taking 15 hours of study, it will cost that student $5,491.25 in tuition.  However, that same student will have to pay $3,601.00 in junk fees and costs other than tuition.  Then they mislead the legislature, the ranking services, and those reporting on law schools about the true cost of attending their law school. Somehow, Texas university and law schools believe if they lie to the press and the legislature about how much they are really increasing the cost of education, that people can still somehow afford to pay for them.  But, this study is very telling - if not very damning.

My daughter's experience is pretty telling.  The University of Houston told the World they were increasing tuition 6%, after years of massive tuition increases, so they could try and become a Tier 1 university.  Yet, with the increase in junk fees, and with something called "Tuition NDO", which the best I can tell is tuition in addition to the tuition or some kind of secret tuition that is charged, the increase came closer to a 16% increase over the previous year.  Of course the university told the legislature that it would in turn make provisions to cut or eliminate tuition for those students whose families make under $30,000.00 a year, which is a very admirable thing.  The result of this seemed to be to take $2,500.00 in scholarships away from my law school daughter on top of the nearly 16% increase in tuition, and on very short or no notice.  Ouch!

And, UH is not the only one.  The University of Texas now says it will increase tuition even further by enacting 7% increases each year for two years.  One study is telling.   In 1985, tuition and fees at public law schools for in-state students, ran about $2,006 per student per semester.  In 2007, tuition and fees for the same schools averaged $15,455.00.  In 2002 the tuition increased 20% for this group of schools and students.  In 2003 it increased 8% again.  In 2004 it increased 10% again.  In 2005 it increased 10% again.  In 2006 it increased 8% again.  And, in 2007 it increased 9% again.  This does not even count the increase in tuition at private law schools.  Virtually every law school has been doing the same thing during a time when investment income has been dramatically increasing.  There is no telling what is going to happen now that investment income is falling.

From where does this money come?  By and large it is debt.  When UH Law, or most of the other law schools, institute such large increases, they are betting that their students can go even deeper into debt and survive.  The law schools are betting that parents can borrow more money against their homes, or pull even more off their credit cards, or mortgage their families future at levels which can only be considered questionable if not down right irresponsible.

Nobody can much explain, nor do they care to explain, what the continuous large increases and deception about the actual costs of attending law school is all about.  Sure there has been some small inflation over the past few years, but nothing to match the continued increases that have occurred.  Law schools pour more money in the upkeep of antiquated libraries that virtually (pun intended) nobody uses.  But, this does not explain the size and number of tuition increases.  My guess is that the increases are the result of vanity.  All schools are on a race to increase their rankings, their image, and the tier in which they reside, among other things.  This in short costs money -- lots and lots of money.  All most law students want is a competent education and the ability to pass the bar exam, rankings be damned.

My thought is that law schools show immense disrespect to their current students when they raise tuition yearly as they have been.  After all, the students made financial decision, but now most are helpless to do anything but try to finish out what they started.

Make no mistake about it, the tuition increases do represent an insult to student and families because you are asking those, who have no real money, who are trying to do nothing more than to improve their position in life, to take on monumental levels of debt to pay for frivolous expenditures that offer no real substantive benefits, and the law schools did so at a time when inflation was pretty much under control.  Often they did so for no better reason than their competitors where doing it.

In short, if students are getting priced out of college market, the same effect is greater for law schools.  And, this at a time when job potential for graduates is diminishing and earnings have remained stagnant for all but the few Big Law firms who compete for the named law school graduates.

Southern Methodist University Dedman School of Law is a good example.  Its tuition is now over $1,000.00 an hour.  Always known as a mediocre law school primarily for rich kids, the problem is that most private law schools are following suit.  The University of Southern California now tops SMU in tuition as well, as does the University of Pennsylvania Law School, the University of Chicago Law School, and the University of Michigan Law School, just to name a few public law schools.

It is important to note that none of this amount accounts for books, fees (which are increasing even faster than tuition in many institutions), or living expenses (which are almost always grossly under estimated by law schools in their calculations unless you live in a cave while attending law school).

As the race for $40,000.00 a year tuition intensifies and more and more law schools feel they can reach this mark, it means that the majority of law school grads will be doing so with far in excess of a $100,000.00 in debt.  This will rule out many who want to go out on their own after graduation and after passing the bar, it will limit those interested in public interest law or those who might prefer to work at non-profits, for the government and who might want to work as prosecutors.  The pay just will not justify this level of debt.

If colleges in 49 states have lost all notions of affordability, I will tell you this is even more true with law schools.  It makes you ask the question of whether undertaking the practice of law is worth the expenses?  Do you really want to mortgage your entire future and your entire life for this endeavor?

I am telling you, it is enough to make you wonder.

Comments

[Vickie Pynchon]

A relief to find that California still scores some bonus points in education; where I spent two years in State college ($71/semester); two years in U.C. ($240/quarter); and 3 years in U.C. law school ($700/year). UC law tuition now in the high $20's, but that's still a fair bargain. A few inexpensive ways to get a law degree in Cal: 1. spend 1st 2 yrs at Community College; 2. transfer to U.C.; 3. law school at U.C.; Plan B: 1. clerk with a lawyer and read the law (I'm not certain you even need a B.A.); 2. take and pass the Cal "baby" bar; 3. take and pass the bar. Hang out shingle. My father never attended college. Took LSAT; attended a non-ABA accredited law school at night (while driving a Dad's rootbeer truck); passed baby bar & bar the first time; hung out shingle in Beverly Hills ("because," he told me, "that's where the money was") and completed his career on the Los Angeles Superior Court bench.

YES YOU CAN!!

[Carolyn Elefant]

Wow, lawyers aren't even billing out at $1000/hr these days? How will anyone pay $1000/hr tuition?

[PerGynt]

The paper libraries are an important public resource and should not be eliminated. That is why public resources are committed to building and maintaining them.
Otherwise, great post.

[Peter]

University of Chicago isn't a public school.

The NYTimes had this nice piece about general college inflation: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/03/education/03college.html?em

I'd be in rough shape if I didn't go to a state school for law school.