Colorado State University nearly pulled a fast one on state officials and students alike on Wednesday, when it tried to slip a $34 million tuition increase into the so-called Long Bill that finances the government.

Fortunately, that amendment was rejected by a slender 18-15 margin. Yet the ensuing response from CSU President Larry Penley, including a press release that accused Gov. Bill Ritter of "holding down" CSU so that the University of Colorado can thrive, was downright snippy.

The amendment, sponsored by Sen. Peter Groff, D-Denver, would have given CSU the ability to collect three times as much additional tuition money as the $11.3 million agreed to in earlier budget talks.

It would have allowed students from households with incomes that were 200 percent of the federal poverty line or less - roughly $40,000 for a family of four - to get free tuition at CSU.

And it would have increased the number of credit hours full-time students paid for from nine hours a semester to 12.

None of these is a trivial matter. For instance, letting CSU bill students for 12 hours per semester rather than nine while keeping the hourly rate steady would have amounted to a large, unexpected hike in out-of-pocket costs to students. At the current $192.55 per credit hour, a student who took 12 hours or more next fall would see her tuition rise from $1,733 to $2,311 - a 33-percent increase.

Each of these proposals deserved a thorough public debate. And yet they were wrapped in an amendment to the Long Bill - along with more than 40 other proposed changes. This ploy clearly blindsided several senators, who said as much at the time.

We've long believed that state colleges should be able to raise tuition modestly. Higher-ed funding has not recovered from the body blow it absorbed during the recession. But the increases should be gradual, not wrapped into a huge boost that takes place at once.

David Skaggs, executive director of the Colorado Commission on Higher Education, pointed out that with the 7-percent hike in total tuition that Ritter originally proposed for research institutions, CSU should close its credit "window" over several years. We agree.

Skaggs also reported that the university is scheduled to receive roughly 21 percent of the state's higher-ed budget next year. That's a substantial amount, especially since non-research institutions including Metro State and the community colleges get a relative pittance from tuition and federal agencies. They depend on state support just to keep their doors open.

It's unseemly for CSU's leader to accuse the governor of trying to hold his institution down. Why, Ritter's favorite political topic, other than perhaps renewable energy, is the importance of funding for higher ed.

As Skaggs said Thursday, "I believe it is more constructive to address how we can help CSU get ahead, and not whether or how it should get even."

Amen to that.