pays an out-of-state student moving expenses to attend their university. So does it really cost a university more money to house and educate an out-of-state student than an instate student? Or is the current tuition model based on an antiquated model that is based on a time when states were trying to get more of its citizens to be college educated?

I ask because I think most schools still require all first year students to live on campus. During my time at VT I remember WAJ offering the same dorm accommodations to instate and out-of-state. At least not enough to justify charging out-of-state double or even triple the amount of tuition. Likewise, I don't remember the professors giving 1 type of lecture to instate students and a different lecture to out-of-state students. As the cost of tuition continues to go up in the US and as more college graduates leave with large amounts of college debt to pay off, then I would think more out-of-state applicants would start to ask why they are having to pay so much more for their education. Or at the very least decrease the amount of out-of-state applications. If public universities don't want to get to the point where 90-95% of their students are instate, then state governments may start to ask themselves if they can continue to justify the different tuition amounts based on whether the student is instate or out-of-state.