Los Angeles , California ( CNN ) -- I mentor a student who is a senior in a low-performing high school . About 50 percent of the students at his school drop out , while less than 25 percent go to college . His parents did n't graduate from high school , and his father earns about $ 14,000 a year . His grade point average is good enough to qualify him for admission at a few University of California schools . His parents clearly can not afford to pay his way , so how much debt should he incur to get a college education ? And how many tax dollars should go toward supporting that education ? Such questions were on the minds of the thousands of students who demonstrated last week against cuts in public education funding in California . As the state government has struggled to balance its budget -- it faces a shortfall of $ 20 billion over the next 18 months after having cut an even greater amount in the past two years -- student fees have continued to rise . Last fall , U.C . regents approved a 32 percent fee increase for incoming UC freshmen . Tuition will be more than $ 10,000 next year . The cost of an education at a California State University campus or a community college has also jumped significantly . The protesting students believe these budget-balancing attempts have harmed public education and made it even more difficult for students such as the one I mentor to get an education . I 'm not so sure . Fifty years ago , when its coffers were flush , California devised a master plan for higher education that made it possible for anyone who wanted a college degree to obtain one , mostly at taxpayer expense . The assumption was that a college degree was not only beneficial for the individual who earned it ( better job prospects ) but also for the state that subsidized it ( an educated work force that would ensure economic growth ) . Fifty years later , the state is broke . Costs to operate California 's higher education system have sharply risen . Some critics say this is because university and college administrations are too bloated and enjoy too many perks . Others , including last week 's student protesters , aim their ire at the legislature and governor for not being more supportive of students and faculty . What no one seems to accept , however , is that the whole system is broken . California 's taxpayers do n't want to pay higher taxes . In the face of less revenue , the legislature will continue to cut the higher-education budget where it can . The result : declining enrollments , fewer class offerings , teacher furloughs , staff layoffs and a decline in quality . California 's higher-education crisis comes at a critical juncture in its history . President Obama has repeatedly remarked that the United States is no longer among the top industrialized nations in terms of college participation and graduation rates . To reverse the decline , he says the country needs to add 1 million more college graduates a year . For California , that translates into graduating about 100,000 more students a year over the next 10 years . But its public education system is projecting a 300,000-student cutback because of all the budget cuts . So , how can California contribute its share of adding to the number of college graduates ? If voters continue to resist higher taxes , then students fees and tuition will have to continue to go up . Raising fees to match the real price of a U.C . or Cal State education is not necessarily bad if individuals who can not afford to pay for college receive grants and loans . Anyone who gains a college degree should be willing to accept some debt load , but not so much that he or she is forever burdened . The student I mentor will still get grants to attend a U.C . institution , but his loans are also going to increase . He is hesitant , but willing , to accept those debts . But how much more should he have to accept ? What seems crazy , however , is keeping the cost of college below market cost . That , in effect , gives discounts to those individuals who can afford to pay . Most individuals , for example , assume that U.C . Berkeley and Stanford are equivalent institutions but the cost of tuition , room and board this year is roughly $ 25,000 at Berkeley and $ 50,000 at Stanford . Why should someone who can afford the cost of Stanford get a price reduction for going to school at Berkeley ? Californians ca n't have it both ways . If they want a system that effectively subsidizes a free college education for all who qualify for one , it needs a tax structure that pays for it . If voters are unwilling to raise taxes , then those who can afford to pay for college should , and scarce tax dollars should go to those who would otherwise will be blocked from attending . The student I mentor should receive financial help to attend college , and he will benefit from having a college education because he will earn higher earnings . The state will also benefit because he will pay higher taxes . That is a master plan for the 21st century . The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of William G. Tierney .
Students have protested increases in public university tuition fees . William Tierney says taxpayers are balking at paying more to finance colleges . He says that means more affluent students will have to pay more . Why should fees for well-off students be so much lower at Berkeley than at Stanford ?