OPINION & EDITORIAL
Project priorities
Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.
Also by Badger Herald Editorial Board:
- Madison's annual hip-hop conference falters (April 14, 2003)
- Dear Dave: Post this near your desk (April 17, 2003)
- Politicking destroyed opt-out's proponents (April 14, 2003)
- Don't Cut Historical Society Funds (April 29, 2003)
- Redirecting control (April 23, 2003)
Related Stories:
- ASM still wrong (January 22, 2002)
- Where do students rank? (November 12, 2001)
- Paying for incompetence (October 3, 2001)
- Over the borderline (January 29, 2007)
- State should help Minnesotans pay (February 27, 2007)
by Badger Herald Editorial Board
Monday, February 25, 2002
If only the tuition reciprocity between Minnesota and Wisconsin extended to student government officials—we would gladly exchange ours for theirs.
Minnesota’s Student Services Fee Committee just cut nearly $400,000 from next year’s student fees. Members of the committee said since the state’s budget crunch would likely result in a tuition increase, they wanted to cut their part of tuition and reduce the impact on students.
Contrast that attitude to both Chancellor John Wiley and ASM:
In a surprise move Thursday, Chancellor John Wiley announced UW would prioritize building a new student activity center over investing in academic buildings.
While the necessity of a student activity center is debatable (we think there are more cost-effective and campus-friendly alternatives), the negative effect on current UW students is obvious. Once approved, construction of the new building will cost every UW student nearly $20 a semester, regardless of whether the students will graduate before the buildingÕs completion.
SSFC also approved $1.435 million last week for the SERF expansion project. While we agree the SERF needs an upgrade, each student will have to pay another (approximately) $17 per semester.
These budgets would be far more palatable had ASM not raised student organization budgets 84 percent, costing students an additional $28 per year. ASM should have kept in mind the cost of the student activity center and SERF expansion before it fleeced the student body.
It is becoming increasingly clear that means of appropriating money need to be completely overhauled. SSFC and ASM should not make any budget decisions until they have reviewed every budget. This would encourage ASM and SSFC to adopt priorities when distributing student fees and would hopefully avoid situations like this year’s, when the seg fee increase will nearly match the inevitable tuition increase in real dollars (and dwarf it as a percentage). Until then, ASM’s pleas of student poverty will continue to ring hollow.
