Editorial Critique: Tuition Revenue Bonds

The editorial in The Dallas Morning News addresses the issue of adding tuition revenue bonds to the special sessions called by Gov. Rick Perry.  It was written to explain that for the state to sustain its powerful economy, it needs well-funded universities that supply talented workers.  The target audience for the article includes Texas residents, universities, legislators, and Gov. Perry who all have a stake in the issue.  The goal of the bonds is to help Texas state universities raise revenues for construction projects by offering bonds backed by the state at reasonable interest rates.  This will allow universities to finance the construction of engineering, medical, and other pertinent facilities.  Another key factor is that the state stands to benefit by issuing the bonds now while interest rates are still low.  All of these factors demonstrate the relevance of the issue; however, the problem is that this issue has been put on hold until other legislation can be decided.  Rep. Dan Branch, R-Dallas, has already worked on the tuition revenue bonds with his recently introduced HB 5 legislation, but in order for the issue to be voted on it needs to be added by Gov. Perry to the special session call.  Gov. Perry has stated that he would consider adding the tuition revenue bonds to the special session, but only after his original list of issues has been resolved. Therefore, with less than two weeks before this current session ends on July 30, time is clearly a limiting factor.  With a $1.4 trillion state economy, Texas is a dominant business leader in the U.S. and abroad.  However, the editorial argument is that the state needs to invest in additional university facilities to continue to foster talented, innovative college graduates.

Overall, this editorial creates a substantiated argument by laying out the logical reasons why tuition revenue bonds are an important issue.  By providing background on the current special sessions called by Gov. Perry and Rep. Dan Branch’s HB 5 legislation, the average Texas resident is able to understand the incentive for passing the legislation.  The problem is that the editorial falls short of grabbing the reader’s attention.  For instance, rather than waiting until the very last paragraph to show how this legislation could affect Gov. Perry’s legacy, I believe the editors should lead with this information.  Then, the factual elements of a looming special session deadline, the interest rate risk, and the impact on the Texas economy become more engaging to the reader.  Also, the article did not specifically address the political viewpoints of both Republicans and Democrats on the issue.  In addition, the only stakeholder offered a clear call to action was Gov. Rick Perry.  Therefore, while I agree with the strong evidence presented, the fact that the editorial failed to grab the reader’s attention, address the partisan views on the issue, and give a well-rounded call to action caused it to fall short for me.