FACT CHECK: Romney Raised Fees So Dramatically That The Adams Scholarship Had Little Impact

Mitt Romney’s video about the Adams Scholarship is deceiving and misleading. Coincidentally, that’s exactly how the program was described by Massachusetts parents. The truth is that fees soared at Massachusetts colleges and universities by 63 percent, and because the Adams Scholarship only covered tuition, the program covered just 7 percent of education costs at the state’s flagship university.

ROMNEY MISLED PEOPLE ABOUT THE ADAMS SCHOLARSHIP

PARENTS COMPLAINED OF THE “DECEIVING” AND MISLEADING PROMISE OF FREE TUITION

Huffington Post: “Eventually, Parents Became Agitated About The Adams Scholarship's Misleading Promise.”  [Huffington Post, 8/21/12]

The “First Adams Acceptance Letters Emphasized Only The Free Tuition – Not The Significant Fees.” “The first Adams acceptance letters emphasized only the free tuition — not the significant fees that, like the fine print on a credit card contract, could impose heavy costs on Adams scholars. (Recent letters are much clearer.)” [Op-Ed Edward Glaeser, Boston Globe, 8/8/12]

Emily Schmarsow, A Single Mother Of Two, Was “Very Upset” When “She Received An Activities Bill From Amherst Totaling $7,881, Four Times The Cost Of The Waived Tuition.” “As the Patriot Ledger reported in 2009, Emily Schmarsow -- a single mother of two who said she was ‘dancing a jig in the kitchen’ when her son won the scholarship -- ‘was really upset’ when she received an activities bill from Amherst totaling $7,881, four times the cost of the waived tuition.” [Huffington Post, 8/21/12]

Paul Foster Wrote A Letter Romney Calling The Scholarship “Deceiving” - “It Became Apparent That This 'Full Tuition** Scholarship Was Not Even Worth $300.00!” “Paula Foster was similarly thrilled when her daughter won the scholarship. But, as she wrote in a 2005 letter to Romney, ‘it became apparent that this 'full tuition** scholarship was not even worth $300.00!’ Foster called the scholarship letter ‘deceiving,’ saying it failed to explain that ‘tuition is a fraction of the cost of a school.’” [Huffington Post, 8/21/12]

SINCE ROMNEY’S SCHOLARSHIP ONLY COVERED TUITION, IT ONLY COVERS 7% OF COSTS AT MASSACHUSETTS’ FLAGSHIP UNIVERSITY

Romney’s John And Abigail Adams Scholarship Only Covered Tuition, “Which Is Not Much” And “Accounts For Just 7 Percent Of The Cost Of Attendance” At UMass Amherst. “But critics still note that the scholarship covers only tuition, which is not much. At UMass Amherst, it accounts for just 7 percent of the cost of attendance.” [Boston Globe, 6/20/12]

DUE TO DEEP FUNDING CUTS ROMNEY’S FIRST YEAR, FEES SOARED AT COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES 63%, WHILE TUITION, COVERED BY THE ADAMS SCHOLARSHIP, REMAINED CONSTANT

Romney Cut Higher Education By “About 140 Million, Or About 14 Percent” His First Year In Office, And During His Tenure “Fees Soared 63 Percent” As A Result Of “Deep Budget Cuts.” “Another shift hit students at state colleges and universities, where fees soared 63 percent during Romney’s tenure, from an average of $2,959 in 2003 to $4,836 in 2007, according to the state Board of Higher Education. The fee hikes were enacted by each campus to offset deep budget cuts of about $140 million, or about 14 percent, during the fiscal crisis.” [Boston Globe, 6/29/07]

The Adams Scholarship’s Award Of “Free Tuition Meant Little Because Non-Tuition Fees Are Egregiously High,” And While Romney Was Governor, “Tuition Leveled Out” And “Other College Costs Grew By 63 Percent.” “There was only one problem: due to the structure of university costs in Massachusetts, free tuition meant little because non-tuition fees are egregiously high. For example, the scholarship covered only 7 percent of total costs at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, according to the Boston Globe. And while tuition leveled out, other college costs grew by 63 percent during Romney's tenure.” [Huffington Post, 8/21/12]

Education Commissioner David Driscoll: “Over Time, Institutions Were Charging More And More On Fees But Leaving Tuition Alone.” “‘[MA Education Commissioner David] Driscoll told The Huffington Post. ‘Over time, institutions were charging more and more on fees but leaving tuition alone.’” [Huffington Post, 8/21/12]

A RECENT STUDY SHOWED THAT ADAMS SCHOLARSHIP WINNERS WENT TO LESS-COMPETITIVE COLLEGES, DID NOT SAVE MUCH MONEY, AND STUDENTS WHO JUST MADE THE SCHOLARSHIP CUTOFF WERE LESS LIKELY TO GRADUATE THAN THEIR COUNTERPARTS WHO JUST MISSED

A Study Showed That Adams Scholarship Winners “Go To Less-Competitive Colleges, With Lower Average SAT Scores, Than They Might Otherwise Have Attended” And “Don’t Save Much Money.” “In theory, who could find fault with the Adams Scholarship program, which waives tuition at in-state public colleges for students who do well on the state-mandated MCAS test? But according to new research by Sarah Cohodes and my colleague Joshua Goodman, Adams Scholarship winners go to less-competitive colleges, with lower average SAT scores, than they might otherwise have attended. Worse yet, they don’t save much money.” [Op-Ed Edward Glaeser, Boston Globe, 8/8/12]

Edward Glaeser: “At The Time, There Was Plenty Of Concern About The Plan’s Cost, But Few Imagined That The Program Might Hurt The Scholars Themselves.” [Op-Ed Edward Glaeser, Boston Globe, 8/8/12]

The Study Showed Scholarship Winners Just Above The Cutoff Were More Likely To Enroll In Four-Year In-State Colleges, But Were Less Likely To Graduate From A Four-Year College Than Those Who Had Just Missed Out On The Scholarship. “To study the effects of Adams Scholarships, Cohodes and Goodman looked at similar students — those just above and just below the relevant cutoff in their district — and controlled for race, gender, and family income….After four years, the students who had just squeaked over the Adams threshold were 2.2 percentage points less likely to graduate from a four-year college than students who had just missed out on the scholarship. Some of this gap may disappear over time.” [Op-Ed Edward Glaeser, Boston Globe, 8/8/12]

The Adams Scholarship “Initially” Steered Students To “In-State Public Institutions, Which After Years Of Budget Woes Are Attracting Students With Lower Credentials And Employing Fewer Teachers Per Student.” “But at least initially, the award seems to have hurt academic outcomes — presumably by steering students to in-state public institutions, which after years of budget woes are attracting students with lower credentials and employing fewer teachers per student.” [Op-Ed Edward Glaeser, Boston Globe, 8/8/12]