The message is in the numbers.

President Mark Hamilton announced his recommendation for the next two years' tuition increases Friday. He wants to increase tuition by 5 percent for both 2008-09 and 2009-10.

If that sounds low, then that's probably because compared to previous years, it is – Hamilton meant it that way. For four years, regents approved 10 percent tuition increases at the urging of the president, who wanted to get the university to a competitive stage. In September, regents approved a 7 percent increase. The 5 percent proposals, while still 1.1 percent above inflation, would be the lowest the campuses have seen years.

In part, Hamilton says this is the least he can do after being unable to get a need based scholarship program up and running. The Legislature has failed over countless years to allocate any money to a scholarship program for low-income students, even though the state consistently ranks toward the bottom of the list nationally in college affordability.

It's hard to figure out what to do to make UA affordable. In September, Hamilton asked the regents to add an extra 3 percent to his 7 percent tuition request in order to fund a need-based program. But student government officials rejected the idea as robbing Peter to pay Paul.

Then this month, a task-force that spent six months examining a proposal to allow students to pay the same rate of tuition for their first four years of college concluded "that a tuition guarantee would not offer cost savings for the student," according to a draft report.

Coupled together, Hamilton says it's his responsibility, out of fairness, to offer students a smaller tuition increase. "Your voice has been heard; future increases must be kept to a reasonable rate to ensure access for Alaska students" Hamilton writes in his memo announcing the tuition plan.

It is intended as a "thank you," Hamilton says. But for us, we should be looking to do more. We should push for need-based aid. Low tuition hikes are appreciated, but the reality is that the university cannot do this forever.

In large part, it's up to voters to bug their legislators and remind them about how affordable education will help produce the workers that will staff the construction of the natural gas pipeline.

At the same time, we as students and as a university must consider unique ideas to solve the long-term affordability question. For example, according to a report commissioned by the regents in 2005, less than 3 percent of the private gift aid UA awards is clearly need-based. Is there any reason this number can't be reversed by encouraging donors to focus on need? Students should also reconsider allowing the university to redistribute some tuition money to need-based aid, if that is what it takes to reach the greater good.

For now, though, this is a well-thought out tuition hike, perhaps the most thoroughly investigated most students have ever seen. Kudos to Hamilton for not forgetting about us.