When you fail to study before exams...

[sanantone]

A common mistake. Some of our rights are spelled out in the Constitution. Your mistake is why some of the founders hesitated to include the bill of rights in the document. They feared people would consider the list exhaustive. Our rights are what our actions, laws, and the courts determine them to be.

We made free public education a right for our children. It is not listed in the Constitution, yet we felt so strongly about it that not even parents are allowed to interfere with that right. If we as a society decide that free higher education should be a right, it can be done.

Exactly. The Constitution basically says that not all rights are enumerated. It is not and never was intended to be an exhaustive list. It would actually be pretty scary if it were because it is humanly impossible to come up with an exhaustive list. The right to privacy is NOT in the Constitution, so I guess people don't think that's a right? The government does not give rights; it recognizes rights. I'm giving everyone a homework assignment. Read the 9th Amendment.

YES! But the flawed assumption is that if taxpayers fund the first 2 years, then students will:

a) finish the first 2 years (currently only 13% of community college students currently finish an associate's degree- most enter and exit the CC system multiple times and eventually leave w/o a degree)

b) plan to pursue additional education beyond what is being provided for free (and some % of those students will not have an AAS/AOS, it will be AA/AS....which doesn't yield return on tax dollars because they haven't learned their contributable skill yet)

c) have the resources to pay for years # 3 and 4

d) can geographically attend years #3 and 4
-or-
have a computer and reliable internet to attend years #3 and 4 as a distance learner assuming that's an option in their major

e) will contribute back into society with their degree by becoming employed in some way that elevates our economy- though occupation incentives aren't part of this discussion.

The point is that for my tax dollars, this is a bad plan. Beyond being unnecessary, even if we had the money to spend (we don't) there is an obscene risk with absolutely zero upside. We already spend tons of money on Pell Grants (which helped my family multiple years btw). Current reports simply do not support that funding a student's education increases outcomes (graduation). This report summarizes a huge analysis of of Pell recipients:

An unprecedented look at Pell Grant graduation rates from 1,149 schools - The Hechinger Report

"The study found that Pell recipients had a six-year graduation rate of 51 percent in 2013 compared to 65 percent for non-Pell students."

(there are multiple barriers to completion that have nothing to do with paying tuition- I think this is lost in translation somewhere, why does everyone think it's just cost?)

"Pell grants are the U.S. Department of Education’s largest single expenditure, making up $31.5 billion of its budget in 2013-14. Because of a quirk in federal policy, there is very little accountability for this money, however; schools must provide their Pell student graduation rates to any prospective applicant who asks, but are not required to report this information to the Department of Education."

(so, we don't even track this money to see if they graduate!)

EDIT to add: I still stand by my position that I don't think cost is the barrier to admission or completion.

You just made an argument for getting rid of the Pell Grant. It would lead to better tracking and more accountability. It would also mean that, since the federal government is holding the purse strings, it can put constraints on prices as it does with Medicare.