This is the sixth in a series of local columns that seek to defend higher education against recent political attacks.
As I argued in my last op-ed, colleges and universities have a moral and ethical obligation to provide students with a complete education. That is, after all, what students are paying for. But when universities stand up for what is right, they risk losing significant funding. Recent national and state legislation threatens to withhold funding from universities that refuse to remove certain topics from their curricula.
Public universities charge significantly lower tuition and fees than private universities because their budgets are supplemented by state funding. When that funding is reduced, universities face two choices: lower the quality of education and services they provide or increase tuition and fees. As state funding continues to decline, it’s clear which choice most universities have been forced to make.
Consider Mississippi State University. Ten years ago, the state appropriated $95.87 million to MSU. Adjusted for inflation, that figure should be roughly $134 million in 2025-2026 (which corresponds to the most recent state budget). Instead, the state appropriated just $109 million. The difference has been made up through steep increases in tuition and fees.
Despite limited state support, Mississippi’s universities have been fiscally responsible and nationally competitive. They rank second in the nation in percentage of state funding used for research, agriculture, public health care services, and medical schools. Even more impressive, three of our public universities have earned R1 status from the Carnegie Foundation – meaning they produce new knowledge rather than merely transmit existing knowledge. For a small state like Mississippi, having three R1 universities is remarkable. Neighboring Tennessee, with more than twice our population, also has three. On a per capita basis, Mississippi ranks fifth in the nation for public R1 universities.
The takeaway is clear: Mississippi already underfunds higher education, yet our universities continue to deliver exceptional results. Now they are being asked to reduce the quality of the education by omitting certain subjects for political reasons. Censoring knowledge is antithetical to the mission of higher education. Yet, the likely outcome of resisting such pressure will be further funding losses – which will either drive tuition and fees even higher for Mississippi families or dismantle the world-class system we have spent decades building.
As a native Southerner, the first analogy that comes to mind is trying to make gumbo without all the ingredients. Imagine your local church asks you to make gumbo for a fundraiser. They’ll provide the chicken and sausage, and you’ll take care of the rest. You agree to sell each bowl for $5, expecting that the main ingredients will be covered. But when the day comes to cook, the church tells you they decided not to buy the meat after all. Suddenly, you’re faced with two choices: either go out and buy those ingredients yourself—which means raising the price – or make it without them. But who wants meatless gumbo? Everyone knows the chicken and sausage aren’t optional—they’re what give the dish its flavor and substance.
That, in essence, is the situation colleges and universities are facing. We’ve been tasked with preparing a rich, nourishing educational experience—the kind that prepares students to think critically, contribute meaningfully, and compete in the modern world. But we’re being told we can’t use certain “ingredients.” We’re being asked to leave out essential topics or perspectives that make education complete, or to cover the costs ourselves by raising tuition and fees.
Just like gumbo, education requires a balance of ingredients—diverse ideas, open dialogue, and the freedom to explore complex issues. When certain elements are removed for political reasons, what remains may still resemble education on the surface, but it lacks the depth, richness, and truth that make it meaningful. And just as no one would pay the same price for a watered-down, meatless gumbo, students and families shouldn’t be asked to pay more for an incomplete education.
The recipe for higher education has always relied on academic freedom and intellectual diversity. When those key ingredients are withheld, the final product suffers—and so do the students, the institutions, and ultimately, the communities that depend on them. Mississippians must consider not only the moral and ethical costs of allowing politics to dictate classroom content, but also the long-term financial consequences for students, families, and the state as a whole.
Dr. Raymond E. Barranco is professor of sociology at Mississippi State University. He earned his Ph.D. in Sociology from Louisiana State University, and his work has been published in multiple criminology and sociology journals. Dr. Barranco invites readers to send feedback and sociology-related questions you’d like him to address in this space to [email protected].
You can help your community
Quality, in-depth journalism is essential to a healthy community. The Dispatch brings you the most complete reporting and insightful commentary in the Golden Triangle, but we need your help to continue our efforts. In the past week, our reporters have posted 34 articles to cdispatch.com. Please consider subscribing to our website for only $2.30 per week to help support local journalism and our community.
You can help your community
Quality, in-depth journalism is essential to a healthy community. The Dispatch brings you the most complete reporting and insightful commentary in the Golden Triangle, but we need your help to continue our efforts. In the past week, our reporters have posted 34 articles to cdispatch.com. Please consider subscribing to our website for only $2.30 per week to help support local journalism and our community.
