Related topics

Readers question MU tuition increase, DUI checkpoints

April 13, 2019 GMT

The Marshall University Board of Governors on Wednesday approved a 3.5% tuition and fee increase for the 2019-20 school year. That brings tuition to $4,206 per semester for an in-state, full-time undergraduate student. It is the eighth consecutive year the Board of Governors increased tuition, according to a university news release. This increase follows those of 4.25% in 2018, 9% in 2017, 5% in 2016, 3.4% in 2015 and 5% in 2014. An undergraduate who enrolled for the fall semester of 2016 will pay $629 more per semester this fall than when he or she first enrolled. Naturally, followers of The Herald-Dispatch’s Facebook page had a few comments about the tuition increase.

Greg Bunner: “This all began when the federal government started the so-called compassionate ‘student loan program.’ Universities saw the endless pot of money and dove in. Student loans are more of a burden to students than they are helpful. Shame on the government and the university.”

Jeremy B Queen: ”#tradeschools”

Casey Fuller: “Paying over $1,200 a class was ridiculous enough for really not that good of education.”

Janna Salyers: “Boo. From a top fan.”

Renee Smith: “Of course they did. That’s what politicians are about — more money in their pocket.”

Carol DuPuis: “Makes it difficult for my child to return for his senior year.”

Jonathan Wesdog Castillo: “Big oof.”

Brenda Chaney: “They raise it every year.”

Michael Paul Gallimore: “Every year.”

Christi Spears: “Again? Good grief. You’re killing me slowing with my kids. Who gets this many raises? I know I don’t, and I work a mile away from you. Come on.”

Francis Lucas: “This has to be a joke!”

Chad Bentley: “Why don’t they petition this kind of stuff instead of a name on a building or a hot dog stand owner that has a different opinion than them?”

Sara Yoke: “Why can’t you petition both? One does not correlate with the other.”

Travis Cook: “The Board of Governors have to get themselves a raise somehow. On the backs of struggling students and student-parents.”

Guidon Grundlehner: “Or to maintain R2 research status. That stuff doesn’t come cheap.”


Local law enforcement conducted a sobriety checkpoint on U.S. 60 near Interstate 64 Thursday evening. Online readers of The Herald-Dispatch were not impressed.

Rachel Hewett: “Why tell the public? Saying there will be a checkpoint means they’ll avoid driving in the area of the check point.”

Mike Ballburn: “State law.”

Garren Cole: “Because check points are unconstitutional, so their work around is to tell everyone beforehand. ... Gotta reach that quota!”

Virginia Mulcahy: “Can’t search without warrant or constitution. The publicity is a protection of your rights, and in any case, the checkpoint will do its job and keep drunk drivers off the road, either through arrest or deterrence.”

Garren Cole: “If you check into the numbers you’ll find DUI checkpoints don’t actually yield many DUI tickets/arrests. It’s mostly people busted for an expired inspection sticker. I think they’re particularly pointless in the Huntington area because there a million ways to get where you’re going. ...”

Jonathan Price: “I always tell them to enjoy spending their grant money. That’s how this nonsense is normally funded.”