An unusual scholarship program

North Carolina's new athletic scholarship program for some public and private college students appears to be unusual compared to other states, according to a review of legislation by the National Conference of State Legislatures.

The bipartisan organization, which provides research and other technical expertise to state legislatures, found that only a handful of states have set up programs outside of the typical booster clubs that help pay for athletic scholarships, reports Dan Kane.

None say that general fund revenues will help pay for the scholarships, as North Carolina now does.

Read more after the jump.

–––––

Three states, Nebraska, Nevada and Wisconsin, have vanity license plate fees that can be directed toward athletic departments, though only Nevada specifies that some of the proceeds can go toward athletic scholarships.

New Mexico allows student tuition and fees to go toward athletic scholarships, while Florida allows part of a financial aid fee for community college students to go toward athletic scholarships.

One state, Kansas, forbids any public funds from being used for athletic scholarships.

Last month, North Carolina lawmakers passed a budget that includes a provision for 20 students at the state's 10 historically black colleges to receive a partial athletic scholarship worth $1,250 annually. The provision was put into the final version just hours before the vote and received no debate.

Government watchdogs said the $500,000 provision was another example of questionable legislation that would not survive if offered in a stand-alone bill.

It appears to be the first time the state has directly funded athletic scholarships, though two years ago, thanks to another provision in the 2005 budget, lawmakers began allowing athletic scholarships for out-of-state recruits to be charged at instate tuition rates.

Late last week, House Minority Leader Paul Stam, an Apex Republican, slammed the provision and several others, saying they violated the House's rules on prohibiting additional items that were in neither the House or Senate's budget bills from being inserted into the final package.

"Previously under the reign of Speaker (Jim) Black the rules were generally ignored," Stam said. "In 2007 the Rules of the House were generally followed, except with respect to the final budget in which the most important rule was obliterated, at great cost to the taxpayers."