State officials say that, due to rising tuition costs and low investment returns, the prepaid tuition program is $64 million short of the money it will need to pay its current contracts.

Today, it is still paying college tuitions. But the program will run out of money in 2017, according to current estimates, said deputy state treasurer Scott Malyerck.

Hmm... Funny, they don't mention the budget cuts.

The tuition prepayment plan allowed any S.C. parent or guardian to buy up to four years of college at existing tuition rates for their children who are in 10th grade and under. The prepayment shielded the parents from the added cost of subsequent tuition increases, sometimes double-digits in recent years.

Lawmakers closed the program to new participants in 2007. Similar programs across the country are struggling to remain solvent. In Alabama, for instance, parents are fighting to force the state to fulfill its contracts.

So, Republicans in this state decided to close the program two years ago. Parents are having to dig in against state legislatures to keep contracts alive. This is interesting.

Then this tidbit stuck out...

Part of the problem is that tuition at state colleges "skyrocketed" earlier this decade, Malyerck said. The rate of tuition increases has slowed in the past two years.

Seeing this, I ventured to some other states who have similar programs. In Florida, they same the same thing - and provide the "sticker shock" to prove it. But something stuck out here as well.

Prepaid-plan prices tend to rise as projected college costs go up. But the big jolt this year is the skyrocketing price of an optional plan that helps cover the cost of a new mandatory fee at state universities.

...purchasing the base plan alone will not come close to covering overall tuition and fees. So you'll have to buy both plans if you want to cover all those costs.

University officials and state lawmakers have a name for the new mandatory fee. They call it "differential tuition." In practical terms, it's viewed as a tuition hike.

So, in Florida, parents face a mandatory fee - but can buy an optional plan to cover it. Two plans to cover all costs for college, prepaid. To me, it's the taxes that should be paid already, but are not. Instead, we have a optional plan to pay taxes. If you read the story, how can the middle class afford such a plan. One person saw the problem.

Stanley G. Tate, who helped create the prepaid program and was the first board chairman, railed against the proposed expansion of differential tuition during the past legislative session, saying it would ultimately make an education at the state universities unaffordable to lower- and middle-income families.

If the state would tax like it should, this wouldn't have to be a plan. But the shocker, to me, was the fact that some lobbying went on against the middle class. And who did the lobbying?

Florida's public universities lobbied for differential tuition as a means of raising money to improve undergraduate education. The schools complained that they were at risk of falling behind better-funded schools in other states in the competition for top students and faculty.

State law establishing differential tuition at three schools was passed in 2007.

Ah yes, 2007. What a year. The same year South Carolina closed its prepaid college tuition program.

Earlier, we saw stated that college tuition in South Carolina rose significantly before 2007, then slowed as of two years ago - 2007.

Why? I can only speculate. But, in 2004, something happened at one S.C. university and put the blame on one item: Budget cuts at the statehouse.

USC trustees voted Thursday to increase tuition midyear by 4.9 percent, or $98 per semester, for undergraduates attending the university's Columbia campus.

The unusual spring tuition increase was first discussed last week by President John Palms and Provost Jerry Odom to offset the state's midyear 4 percent budget cut.

It brings USC's year-to-date increase to 10.4 percent, making tuition $2,080 a semester for South Carolinians and $5,550 a semester for those from outside the state.

Now, let's bring this home...

State Republicans in South Carolina are known for budget cutting. They don't want to tax - therefore nothing gets supported with public funds because taxes don't come in. As you read in the Sun News story, Republicans act shocked, as if something needs to be done to help the parents. Too late. The parents need to realize that they voted in people who ultimately decided against them in 2007 as far as help goes.

In Florida, the lobbying was done, as far as I see, to protect the universities' interests. It wasn't done to help the parents - especially middle class ones. Florida's program is one of the most popular in the country. However, with up to 11 universities able to charge the "differential fee" and basically sticking parents with the extra cost, this demeans the very program meant to help students get an education paid for early. On the other hand, seeing that the state cuts the budget of public universities, they have to cover costs somehow.

In conclusion, it really seems the Republicans have failed the parents of South Carolina - and other places - with their tax cuts beyond means and the drastic budget cuts made each year in the statehouse. Now, parents - taxpayers - feel the pain. But hey, you parents vote Republican.

You love not paying taxes where they are required to be. To be honest, it's your voting record that has hurt our children, parents.

Complaining now doesn't really help. Realize what these people stand for and actually do in the statehouse that affects you and vote differently.

Maybe if our state would tax appropriately, we wouldn't have to worry about public universities raising tuitions through the roof. And in Florida, universities might not have to lobby for extra plans that only hurt parents.

Taxes have to paid to enjoy public-funded activities. And in this situation, it's no different.

I leave you with this. Hopefully it will awake some people in this state to change the political landscape - at least for our children's sake.

Why are these plans in a precarious position today? They have two factors working against them: significant increases in tuition at state schools due to cuts in state support (Florida is projecting a 15% increase, Tennessee 9% to provide a few examples) while investment returns have been abysmal in the last year with 50% declines in most major indices. This creates an actuarial crunch in these plans which is why these state guarantees have suddenly become more important. Although our research only found that 40% of plans had some form of state guarantee, if the other funds should run into difficulties, political pressures (these funds in many instances are run out of the state treasuries), may require some bailout, although with state coffers stretched this could be a challenge.