The Badger Herald

OPINION & EDITORIAL

Vote ‘No’ on Union referendum

Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.

Also by Carolyn Smith:

Doyle attempts to undo GOP gaffes (January 31, 2007)

by Carolyn Smith

Thursday, October 19, 2006

The big, nostalgic slogan of the Student Union Initiative is a clever one. It speaks of a time when some 3,000-odd University of Wisconsin students were selfless enough to give $50 each to fund the construction of Memorial Union. It was 1920, and UW was a flourishing flagship university, already achieving greatness in strides. Just as students today take pride in their campus, students in 1920 made UW a priority.

I would like to thank those students from the days of yore; their contribution has meant unfathomable enjoyment for generations of students, alumni and Madison residents.

And now the Student Union Initiative is looking for some goodwill from students nearly a century later. But it seeks to disproportionately burden UW students from here on out with a pricey, poorly thought-out proposal.

The initiative asks students to dish out up to an additional $192 per year — on top of the already steep $650 per year — in student-segregated fees for the renovation of Memorial Union and complete demolition and reconstruction of Union South.

This plan would make some necessary improvements to Memorial Union, but also some frivolous ones, like the expansion of the student lounge and coffee house area.

A new coffee house in a high-density student area? What a novel idea! That is exactly what UW really needs: not a more affordable education, but another place to sip some joe and study. Now why didn't someone think of this sooner?

And as far as the Union South plan goes, the principle makes sense. When it was constructed in the early 1970s, the building — like many other atrocities on campus, such as the Humanities building and Ogg Hall — was intended to only serve students for about 30 years.

But the death sentence of Union South is not something current and future students should have to pay so much for.

The cute Student Union Initiative slogan also notes the $50 each student paid back then amounts to about $500 in today's economy.

Since 1920, however, the cost of tuition has skyrocketed, far outpacing inflation.

And what this catch phase doesn't note is that tuition itself was actually less than $50 at the time the donations were made. So, this would mean tuition back then was the equivalent of less than $500 now. Asking students who are paying more than 10 times that amount in tuition doesn't compare to the student burden in 1920.

So, here's a thought: Why not put more resources and efforts into lobbying alumni who are now in secure, well-paying jobs to chip in? While most of them may not benefit

directly from the renovations and reconstruction, well, neither will we.

Maybe reallocate some of the student-segregated fees from other avenues to lighten the load, cut some of the pork from the plans and generate some more revenue through existing Union events and services.

Had the seg-fee hike this initiative proposes been more modest, this referendum might have been easier to stomach. Had other efforts to garner more cash been completely exhausted, this proposal may seem more reasonable.

Granted, times have changed since 1920. Actually, a lot has changed since then, which is why this initiative doesn't even compare to the donations made by students back in the good old days. Some students gave willingly — in a one-time rush for student action, not an annual burden spanning 30 years. Students today are being asked to impose a dramatic increase in what every UW student will be forced to pay tomorrow — possibly until 2037.

One thing is certain: Year to year, the cost of getting an education at UW is never going to get cheaper, and tacking on additional fees to foot the bill for such an inflated plan is something students should not have to shoulder. Not now, nor 10, 20 or even 30 years down the line.

Carolyn Smith (csmith @badgerherald.com) is a continuing student at UW.

Feedback

Show all comments

Hide anonymous comments

Anonymous (October 19, 2006 @ 1:25am):

Wrong. You will go back to the union when you are an alumni. Too bad the PR Machine of SLAC and those opposed to a UW union did a poor job this semester. It's going to pass.

Anonymous (October 19, 2006 @ 8:34am):

"And what this catch phase doesn't note is that tuition itself was actually less than $50 at the time the donations were made. So, this would mean tuition back then was the equivalent of less than $500 now. Asking students who are paying more than 10 times that amount in tuition doesn't compare to the student burden in 1920."

This just shows the great sacrifice that students were willing to make. THEY GAVE MORE THAN TUITION COSTS....The student union initiative is asking for less than 1% of tuition...

Anonymous (October 19, 2006 @ 8:57am):

Maybe the out-of-state students should be bent over a little farther? They already fund three in-state tuitions, why not make them pay for the Union?

Bah! What a bunch of whiners. This is a tiny percentage increase in the total cost of a year in school - even for somebody paying in-state tuition.

ps. Be sure to include the opportunity cost of forgone wages in your analysis of total cost.

Anonymous (October 19, 2006 @ 9:08am):

Good work.

Cost to:
Freshmen: $384
Sophomores: $192
Juniors: $96
and possibly for students thereafter: $768

Last chance to vote on this $157 million project is today! Students will be burdened with this for the next 30 years.

Anonymous (October 19, 2006 @ 9:34am):

"So here's a thought: why not put more resources into lobbying alumni...?"

That's already being done. Students will pay a MAXIMUM of 58% of the costs. They will pay less if more donations are raised; the rest will come from operating revenues. Covering more than half the cost gives students control over what happens at a new south campus Union and how it's built.

You get what you pay for: If students don't pony up, someone else will. But then it won't remain a STUDENT union. Good luck finding student space there if that happens.

Anonymous (October 19, 2006 @ 9:41am):

What will your legacy be?

I helped preserve Memorial Union and build a state-of-the-art, "green" south campus union...
or
I saved a couple of hundred bucks.

What will mean more to you when you return to campus 10 or 20 years from now?

Anonymous (October 19, 2006 @ 10:16am):

We pay a lot more in our tuition to construct buildings like the new dorms and all that shit near the hospital. Why is it such a big deal that students want their money to go to a building they actually use??????

Anonymous (October 19, 2006 @ 11:21am):

Affordable tuition????? In what way is a UW education not affordable!!!!!! Who the F do you expect to lower costs? Money does not just appear. This is a public university, and therefore, driven by tax dollars. Lower tuition means more tax dollars must come in OR state budget resources must be redirected (which means a different group loses). You whine and whine, but offer nothing in terms of solutions. If you want to keep the union crappy, fine. But don't expect someone else to pick up the slack either.

Anonymous (October 19, 2006 @ 11:31am):

9:41 says: "I helped preserve Memorial Union and build a state-of-the-art, 'green' south campus union...
or
I saved a couple of hundred bucks"

The better option is: Not only did I save hundreds of dollars, I prevented other students from footing the $91 million bill. The improvements to the union can happen through donations and by voting no, i'm limiting the amount that students are forced to pay.

The "legacy" argument is a crock. Students that want that feeling should help pay for it and not vote for students to pay for this for the next 30 years.

Anonymous (October 19, 2006 @ 11:57am):

I think our Unions need more commercialization. McDonalds, Taco Bell, Burger King inside. Those will offset huge costs, and save money as you won't have to pay 8 people $10.23 an hour to do the job that 4 can do at $8.00 and hour.

Anonymous (October 19, 2006 @ 3:09pm):

"This just shows the great sacrifice that students were willing to make. THEY GAVE MORE THAN TUITION COSTS....The student union initiative is asking for less than 1% of tuition..."

... because you're willing to sack future generations with 95% of the bill. You want to be noble? You cough up $6000 and pay your full share. It doesn't take a referendum to do your part.