NEWS
Nass: Conference lacks any balance
Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.
Also by Cassie Kornblau:
- Incumbent Kind knocks down Barrett challenge (November 5, 2008)
- Supporting McCain amid Obamamania (October 27, 2008)
- Social media conquer politics (October 23, 2008)
- UW fundraising shaken (October 22, 2008)
- The graying of UW faculty (October 9, 2008)
Related Stories:
- Whitewater chancellor steps down (April 9, 2007)
- Vocal UW critic to chair committee (December 12, 2006)
- Nass protests wasteful GOP negotiations with committee (May 7, 2007)
- Legislators push system to leave seg fee policies alone (December 5, 2007)
- Talking education with Nass (October 15, 2007)
Share This:
by Cassie Kornblau
Friday, April 20, 2007
The chair of the Assembly Committee on Colleges and Universities raised objection Thursday to a University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee conference on immigration.
Rep. Stephen Nass, R-Whitewater, sent a letter to University of Wisconsin System President Kevin Reilly saying the conference fails to take a balanced approach, calling it a "blatant" one-sided event that appears to be sympathetic toward lawbreakers.
The conference, titled "Immigration: Many Faces; Many Facets" — sponsored by the UW System Institute on Race and Ethnicity and the UW-Milwaukee School of Continuing Education — is scheduled to take place April 26-27.
"This conference has 60 presenters and four keynote speakers, and not even one is an expert on illegal immigration and the need to secure our border," Nass said in a release. "However, the UW System staff organizing the conference found keynote speakers from the Anti-Deportation Movement and another that equates illegal immigrants as the new civil rights movement."
UW System spokesperson David Giroux said the academic conference is a conference on the topic of immigration, not illegal immigration — which is only one aspect of the discussion.
"We are not going to second-guess every lecture, class and conference around all 26 campuses," Giroux said. "Over time the university, by its very nature, presents multiple views on any given topic."
Giroux said any groups were allowed to present at this conference if their topic was relevant to the theme of immigration.
"The university invites critique and review," Giroux said. "It invites people to bring opinions supported by data. This is the very nature of scholarship."
In addition, Nass said in the letter he was troubled by the response of administrators at the UW System Institute on Race and Ethnicity after he requested financial data outlaying the cost of the conference.
"The public has the right to know if taxpayer dollars have been used to subsidize this farce of an academic conference," Nass said in a release. "Refusing to provide this information is a horrible mistake at a time when the legislature is handling the biennial state budget."
However, Giroux said the UW System was asked to provide the financial information yesterday afternoon and has since sent the data to Nass' office. Currently, the projected cost by the UW System for the conference is $3,232 from public funds.
The data, Giroux said, finds 62 percent of the anticipated costs of the conference will be covered by registration fees from the 166 people who are registered for the conference, but added the gross product revenue needed to fund the conference will likely decline as more people attend.
In his letter, Nass said that despite his objections to the balance and finances of the conference, immigration is a national policy issue that should be discussed.
Reilly will likely respond to Nass' disapproval of the conference next week in a letter, according to Giroux.
Anonymous (April 20, 2007 @ 4:45am):
Sweet Jesus I hate Steve Nass.
Jane Doe (April 20, 2007 @ 9:53am):
Steve Nass is totally right! Its time the UW start showing both sides of this issue!!!
Anonymous (April 20, 2007 @ 10:13am):
Rep. Steve Nass is right about one thing: Immigration is a national policy that should be discussed.
Unfortunately, much of the discussion is taking place on blab radio in the context of a Republican witch hunt, spurred by legitimate fears that immigrants will eventually attain citizenship, and gain the right to vote against the witch hunters.
The reason they're illegal immigrants in the first place is that America no longer welcomes the tired, the poor, the huddled masses. But never mind, that's too complicated an issue for politicians whose learning curve involves sound bites, focus groups and right-wing talking points.
The problem is that the U.S. economy depends on immigrants to do the dangerous jobs in slaughterhouses, the back-breaking jobs in the fields and the grunt work in the construction industry.
Instead of shooting off his mouth on a subject he knows so little about, Rep. Nass should work some of those jobs for a year, write a book about his experiences, and apply to be on a panel at the next conference on how illegal immigrants are taking good jobs away from U.S. citizens.
Anonymous (April 20, 2007 @ 10:21am):
I am preparing a new course for next year. Perhaps Nass would be willing to meet with me to be sure the subject matter denegrates the right groups, and valorizes the right groups. I sure would hate to disappoint him.
Anonymous (April 20, 2007 @ 12:56pm):
Me too.
-Jesus
Anonymous (April 20, 2007 @ 1:07pm):
And he probably hates you.
Anonymous (April 20, 2007 @ 8:09pm):
One would think a legislator would have something more imporant to do than take shots like this constantly. But I guess Mr. Nass needs to keep his name in the news via his own press releases. Think of the time wasted by Chancellor Riley responding to this stuff, time better spent on making the university a better place for the future of the state.
Anonymous (April 21, 2007 @ 2:18pm):
It's not just illegal immigration.
It's a farking INVASION!
Anonymous (April 21, 2007 @ 7:06pm):
Decided to check out Rep. Nass's concerns by going to the "horse's mouth," i.e., the website of the UW System office hosting the conference. I checked out the conference agenda. No sign of advocating "illegal immigration" to me. (By the way, a more acceptable term is "undocumented," but Nass and his like have little sympathy for propriety.) The conference seems way more "fair and balanced" than the Fox News Channel that Nass once appeared on. By the way, someone should remind Nass that his own Republican President states that current immigration policy is awry and needs to be reformed.
Anonymous (April 22, 2007 @ 10:16am):
To 2:18:
An invasion? Is it a bigger "invasion" than the one your grandparents or great-grand parents were part of?
Please.
Anonymous (April 22, 2007 @ 9:01pm):
Give Nass credit for holding UW accountable. That's what we need after all these fiascos at UW. We have had the Barrows, Barrett, Cohen, Coronado, Backup appointments, Goodwin, APBS, and marching band disasters. We need Nass to keep the heat on until UW shapes up.
Anonymous (April 22, 2007 @ 10:11pm):
Reasons "illegal" imigration should be a major topic at the conference.
1. Illegal immigrants enterying the U.S. outnumber legal immigrants.
2. A 2006 Time magazine poll showed that nearly 66% fo those surveyed disapproved of President's Bush handling of immigration.
3. Califormina is one of nine states that offer tuition to illegal aliens, which then means less money can be given to legal immigrants.
4. Illegal immigrants, in some cases, are driving down wages for legal resident workers,
5. Related to illegal immigration, Mexico is exporting poverty and importing a portion of its economy thanks to millions of Mexicans living in the U.S. sending money back to Mexico.
6. Related to illegal immigration, NAFTA helped create the illegal immigration crisis.
Anonymous (April 23, 2007 @ 12:15am):
To 9:01:
If you follow Nass at all, you quickly realize that the last thing he wants is to "hold UW accountable." If he wanted a constructive, resonsible relationship with the UW, he would work with UW officials in a professional manner instead of sending firebombs in the form of press releases and public letters. He needs a reified version of the UW in order to insense and enrage his voters.
Nass has no interest in statesmanship when it comes to the UW. Antagonism suits his ends just fine.
Anonymous (April 23, 2007 @ 12:15am):
"We have had the Barrows, Barrett, Cohen, Coronado, Backup appointments, Goodwin, APBS, and marching band disasters."
And how did Nass address these? Barrows was railroaded by Luoluo Hong. Nass would have fired him instead of demoting. Nass would have prevented Barret from teaching and by all accounts he is a great teacher. Cohen and Coronado were fired after due process, Nass would have fired them with no due process. Backup appointments are replaced by contracts that will cost the UW more. The marching band was immature behavior that Nass could not have prevented any more than Wiley. No idea who Goodwin and APBS are but let's do this: Give Steve Nass a job at UW to oversee the system and let's see how well he does. He is a front-running moron who would create a REAL mess.
Germane E Stemme
Anonymous (April 23, 2007 @ 10:45am):
I'd like to see an in depth article that focused only on the several times that Nass has publicly demanded the UW to take personnel actions which would have violated state laws.
That would be interesting. When is somebody going to hold that demagogue accountable?
Anonymous (April 23, 2007 @ 10:51pm):
Because Universities are the only employers with the "ivory tower" label, I doubt the UW could be held accountable solely by a "statesmanship" approach.
Nass is in the Legislature and he can not be silenced by UW intimindation or retribution which would be encountered by any UW employee who voiced the same criticisms as Nass.
Anonymous (April 24, 2007 @ 12:02am):
Right. Harnessing the mighty power of the "ivory tower" label.
But back to the point: Nass is overseeing the last days of excellence at UW-Madison.
Anonymous (April 24, 2007 @ 8:21am):
According to the past several years of the U.S. News and World Report magazine's review of college campuses, UW-Madison and other UW System Schools (LaCrosse, Eau Claire) are rising in status compared to their peers, which means UW excellence is improving. One could surmise then that the watchdog role of the Legislature is helping the UW improve its performance.
Anonymous (April 24, 2007 @ 10:02am):
8:21:
It would be a faulty assumption. Nass, and the legislature as a whole, have done demonstrable harm to the UW in the past 5 years. US News rankings have a time lag. Just wait.
Anonymous (April 24, 2007 @ 11:16am):
8:21
I am not sure what you mean by "performance." Look at some of the key indices used by US News for its rankings (faculty-student ratio, spending per student, diversity of student body, availability of aid, and of course standardized scores) and tell me which ones Nass has worked to improve. Then tell me which ones he would happily take in the wrong direction.
Anonymous (April 24, 2007 @ 9:45pm):
The Legislature - which created the UW System and is a higher power over the Board of Regents - was instrumetal in having the UW adopt several accountability measures. Current examples include 1) increase widespread access to UW institutions, 2) increase the levels at which students persist in higher eductation, 3) improve learning competencies, and etc. Rep. Nass may have been involved in the development of some of those measures over time. It is very likely that Rep. Nass is vocalizing taxpayer's concerns on various issues pertaining to the UW.
Anonymous (April 25, 2007 @ 9:31am):
Dear 9:45 (who I presume is a Nass staffer, since the whole post was probably pasted from an internal memo):
1) More widespread admissions to UW institutions is rather meaningless if, once in place, the students can't get seats in their major because of understaffed faculty positions created by faculty flight and shrinking budgets.
Nor, to be honest, will increased admissions help US News rankings (I presume you posted that nugget as well).
2) I assume you mean student retention rates. This is always a concern for all colleges. Historically, UW Madison has had very good retention rates, but thanks for chipping in on that one.
3) Please tell us what "learning competencies" are.
Nass has overseen a historical moment in which the state's support of the UW has dropped to an all time low. No doubt many taxpayers are pleased. But those same taxpayers deserve the worldclass institution that this state has had for many decades. The poster above is right - if Nass had to choose betwene policies that improved the UW, or a scandal he could throw gasoline on (you know "vocalize"), he would choose the scandal. At least, he has consistently done so in the past.
But Nass is fortunate because the causal link between his lack of leadership and the decline of the UW is one that won't show up within an election cycle. Nass knows this, and exploits it.
So, how about an article describing each instance Nass has demanded UW to take personnel actions which would have violated state law?
Anonymous (April 25, 2007 @ 9:40am):
Anyone who has read a press release from Nass's office concerning a UW issue, has to smile at the phrase "vocalizing taxpayer's concerns." When has tried to work effectively with Bascom or the UW system? The man uses press releases like IED's. Artificially inflaming the sensibilities of taxpayers and working to improve the UW system are not the same thing.
Anonymous (April 25, 2007 @ 12:43pm):
Dear 8:21,
I'll give Nass credit for the US News rankings if you will give Nass responsibility for Kevin Barret. After all, the hiring of short-term lecturers (of dubious qualifications) is made necessary by the shortage of qualified tenure-track faculty (which results from the budget cuts Nass glories in). Its a stretch, but so is giving Nass credit for the US N&WR rankings.
Anonymous (April 25, 2007 @ 3:12pm):
I read at lot of the message boards here that mention Nass. As an outsider to this state, I am intrigued by his ilk because I find it a mystery how they thrive here. I have noticed several times now that some posters (ok - likely one poster several times) will defend him and point out the legislature's "higher power" (to quote someone above) or Nass's position of legal authority over the UW. I never thought this was in question. Yes, we all know he is a "decider," too. Rather, aren't there legitimate grounds to suggest that it simply isn't in his political best interests to have a world-class research institution in this state, and that he benefits politically from exploiting harm to the UW (whether it is self-imposed, or imposed by the legislature)? Excellence costs money and resources. And my own sense is that a sizeable contingent of the legislature isn't concerned with excellence. This is why his leadership capabilities should be questioned, not his legally vested authority.
Anonymous (April 26, 2007 @ 8:59pm):
Reading some of these posts I am amazed that anyone would defend the administration of John Wiley. Wiley is a fool, dolt, jerk, and complete jackass. Anyone who has ever dealt with him in a delicate situation knows that. Wiley's attitude toward the legislature has been that Nass and his colleagues should just approve funding for UW and accept whatever Wiley says as the truth. Needless to say, Wiley's approach has only hardened anti-UW attitudes in the legislature and the state. Frankly, Wiley has been a dismal failure as chancellor and has done massive damage to UW-Madison's entire reputation. Blame any rankings decline on Wiley. The Regents should replace him as soon as possible. We need a chancellor who will fix problems, not try to blame them on Steve Nass.
Anonymous (April 26, 2007 @ 11:58pm):
Yes. The Regents probably should replace Wiley. But the last thing we need is a legislator like Nass getting the impression that he actually removed the Chancellor. I think everyone agrees that Wiley completely screwed the pooch on the Barrows issue. But Nass still needs to have his lunch handed to him. So we have to live with Wiley - who seems to be laughably unable to deal with the Adidas situation. But Nass is still a bigger danger to the long term health of the UW, if you ask me.
Anonymous (April 27, 2007 @ 4:13pm):
I suppose we can thank Mr. Nass for taking an interest in academic affairs. Like any citizen, he could actually register and participate in the Race and Ethnicity conference and engage with the scholars who are presenting not just opinions but papers, reports, and research.
As I took in the sessions at the Race and Ethnicity Conference in Milwaukee yesterday, I did not see any representative from Mr. Nass's office. How does he know what presenters were talking about? Session titles can be very general. If Mr. Nass had been there, he could have engaged in a thorough discussion with conference participants about these issues in a fair and conciliatory manner. Scholars are open to debate and to civil discourse.
While Mr. Nass criticizes UW System regarding this conference and its supposed bias, I would like to emphasize that scholarly perspectives are not necessarily partisan and that the consensus Nass seems to discern regarding pro-immigration stances among scholars is indeed a result of research and data support.
If Mr. Nass has a genuine intellectual and not just a political interest in this debate, he should start doing some research. Many of his fellow Republicans do not agree with his position. A majority of the American public is supportive of comprehensive immigration reform leading to a path towards citizenship for undocumented migrants. I suspect that intellectual debate and sifting through data is simply not Mr. Nass's idea for a rainy Thursday.
Anonymous (April 28, 2007 @ 5:13pm):
Nass with intellectual interests releant to impotant policy issues? Ha ha. Stop it, you're killing me.
Anonymous (April 29, 2007 @ 9:32pm):
My view is that Steve Nass has his strengths and weaknesses, but the real problem at UW has been the complete failure of leadership in the UW administration. What are they thinking up at Bascom and Van Hise, anyway? The Barrows, Barrett, Cohen, Coronado, APBS, marching band, Adidas, housekeeper, Kaplan, and Forest scandals have all been mishandled. I mean, it's really bad. It's embarrassing. It plays right into the hands of UW critics who say the whole institution is corrupt and mismanaged. Wiley must be replaced, and Farrell, Reilly, Giroux, and Walsh as well. Whatever you think of Steve Nass, you cannot blame this collapse of leadership at UW on him.
Anonymous (April 30, 2007 @ 11:32am):
I agree that Barrows got railroaded, and probably has a very strong case against teh UW. The convicted felon stuff was handled slowly, and without regard to how it would appear in the media, but again there was the slight matter of state law governing the issue. The UW doesn't write the laws. And yes, Kaplan was left to twist in the wind.
But again, what were Nass's responses? They were opportunistic and bellicose. Is Nass helping the UW govern itself better? If that's the best defense of Nass anyone can come up with, I guess I would say you don't teach a house not to burn by throwing gasoline on small fires.
Anonymous (April 30, 2007 @ 9:29pm):
You are letting Wiley and company off the hook by focusing on Nass. Sometimes he and Suder overreach. That's fair, but it seems clear to me that the problems at UW are very serious and deep in the institution. Usually, where there is smoke there is fire, and the smoke billowing from Bascom and Van Hise since 2005 has been enormous. Ask anyone in the UW administration privately what they think of the leadership of John Wiley the last few years, and they will admit he has been just terrible. They are embarrassed by it. The whole atmosphere on campus has been effected by this, and they are all dreading the upcoming Barrows trial. Newby, Billups, and Durand all left/retired early because of the behavior of John Wiley. Things won't get better here if Nass and Suder keep quiet. We need a new chancellor at UW-Madison, and soon. That's the only change that will help us.
Anonymous (May 6, 2007 @ 9:12pm):
Right.
Add a comment
We welcome your thoughts, but please keep your feedback thoughtful, on-topic and respectful. Offensive language, personal attacks, or irrelevant comments may be deleted.
Login...
Not registered? Sign up now.
It's quick, free, and the email address you provide will not be sold or solicited.
