Basically, a clear goal is needed. The price will be determined by market demand. If student don't want take Math or composition, so be it. Higher Ed is not a place for forcing things down the throat - which maybe nacessay at K12.
You can try to claim the benifits of Math and composition. But without a real life reality supporting it, it won't have much weight. If business realize the value of Math and composition and is paying higher wadge for it, that's the real life reality.
We have to understand that everyone is their own boss, they will resposible for their own decision. What government need to do is preventing criminal acts like flawed claims made by institutions - just like the consumer protection.
Will the price skyrocketing in higher ed.? I don't think so. The current price tag isn't valid if the playing fields go through a radical change. For one, students no longer need to support high paided research professor to teach calculus. (The society's need to support of research is a different issue.)
It is true a lot of educator may loose the job. But this is all it is about. If you can't find people to appreciate your work in educatiion, find people that will appreciate your work some place else. This is the accountability. No one suppose to pay you, if they can't get what they want out of you.
Will the US lost it's competition edge because the reduction in the number of academic researcher? I think not. Just think about IBM, Microsoft and leading companies in the industry, they don't have trouble support reasarches through the benifit of research in a much responsible way. If society so decided that they want to support support research, they should look into industries' model. The current call for accountability of higher ed industry is people's voice that reject the current higher ed practice. This includes the current model for supporting research.