Earlier this month, several students from various organizations here at the University of Wisconsin delivered more than 5,000 signatures to Gov. Jim Doyle’s office, requesting additional state aid for the UW System. The coalition included the Associated Students of Madison, the Student Labor Action Coalition, and the Teaching Assistants Association.
To state the obvious, most, if not all, students here support a UW System that minimizes tuition while maximizing educational opportunities. As a student who has saved money from three semester-long, off-campus internships and summer positions to help pay for my degree along the way, I include myself in that category, as the tuition increases over the years have left my pocketbook taking hits. Unfortunately, those echoing these sentiments the loudest lack the credibility necessary to influence change.
One of the first sentences in my high school economics book, namely that “there is no such thing as a free lunch,” summarizes this and many similar problems encountered in economic decisions. Apparently, many members of the vocal coalition lobbying Doyle miss this point. Take, for example, SLAC member Joel Feingold, who recently told this newspaper, “[Governor Doyle is] starving this university. It’s our UW, not yours.”
This quote may sound nice, but it also shows the flawed premises under which the coalition operates. As students who pay tuition and some taxes, UW is indeed “ours,” but ownership also extends to every individual and corporation that pays taxes in the state of Wisconsin.
A student reading his tuition bill will notice the following message: “The Legislature and Governor have authorized $938,675,100 of state funds for the University of Wisconsin System and its students during the 2004-05 academic year. This is a tuition subsidy of $6,959 per student from the taxpayers of Wisconsin.”
This statement explains clearly that the classic “free lunch” analogy also applies to tuition subsidies. That is, nearly $1 billion comes not from a magic money tree but directly out of taxpayers’ pockets, and hence, the Wisconsin economy.
Two weeks ago, this column explained what the Wisconsin Policy Research Institute called “the significant mismatch between the level of state and local spending in Wisconsin and the ability of the state’s citizens to pay for government spending” and, consequently, the negative impacts on economic growth and job creation.
The state Legislature correctly understands that the costs to Wisconsin taxpayers have simply become too great. Doyle may never understand this, but he can at least anticipate the budget that legislators will present to him under this mindset and, accordingly, present the university budget.
As the coalition overlooks the cost to taxpayers, it also seems unconcerned about the many examples of discretionary spending around the university. One of the more recent instances is Doyle’s plan to fund domestic-partner benefits, at a cost estimated by the nonpartisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau of $2.9 million to $5.7 million a year.
One argument recently made in favor of this expense not only supports Doyle’s plan but also calls on the university to “break new ground” in the future. Using this same absurd logic, one could argue that the UW System should immediately “break new ground” and raise tuition above and beyond other Big Ten schools, perhaps even using the extra revenue to create an even more expansive benefits package.
Students will not make the final decision on benefits, but student government directly controls a significant portion of every student’s tuition. Collectively, SLAC and many other organizations take more than $300 from every full-time student’s tuition each semester, all with the blessing of ASM.
One could go on and on listing discretionary spending here at UW, but the point is clear: student activists will rarely question this spending, and in some cases, even participate in it. Perhaps they dismiss this spending as “nickel and dime” expenditures. However, dimes and nickels can eventually add up to many dollars.
If student activists want credibility in lobbying for lower tuition dollars, they need to do their part in watching the dimes and nickels.
Mark A. Baumgardner ([email protected]) is a senior majoring in electrical engineering.