U needs stronger stance against budget cuts

Utah State Legislators on Capitol Hill are telling the U to offer solutions to the looming budget crisis or face the consequences of even more excessive cuts. The U has already surrendered $6.8 million after Gov. Gary Herbert enacted an immediate 3 percent budget cut for all state budgets. That’s equivalent to firing 68 faculty members who each make $100,000 a year, which essentially equates to the professors of the economics and biology departments combined.

Last week, a sub-appropriations committee unanimously passed an additional 4 percent budget cut for Utah’s higher education for fiscal year 2010—about $9 million more. The cut is still pending approval from the Executive Appropriations Committee before it can be voted on during the legislative session. This is in addition to the sub-committee’s discussion of a 5 percent base cut to the U’s budget.

“If we’re going to advocate for you folks (in higher education)...we need a little more specificity than what we’ve had in the past,” said Rep. Mel Brown, co-chairman of the subcommittee.

Sen. John Valentine, also with the subcommittee, is aware that the budget cuts will put the existence of two state colleges in jeopardy. Both the College of Eastern Utah and Snow College could face closure if the cuts go through.

In a statement issued Dec. 17, U President Michael Young said the administration would work with the Legislature and governor to “enact the higher education component for the governor’s proposed 2010-2011 budget.”

“We should take comfort in the fact that our other vital signs are good and that the governor understands the key role higher education plays in the well-being of the state,” Young said in the statement. “Our goal remains to minimize the impact of the budget reductions on the long-term core missions of the university and, to the best of our ability, position ourselves to move aggressively forward once the economy improves.”

Clearly, the recession is shrinking tax revenues, and the state government is scrambling for solutions. Higher education is receiving mixed messages—the governor says it is important, but legislators are knowingly putting it in harm’s way. It is scary that for the second year in a row, the U is in danger of facing substantial cuts because realistic solutions haven’t been offered.

Rather than fighting for its students and faculty to ensure that these cuts don’t hit the university, the administration is instead placing its confidence in the governor alone.

Although the immediate pain of the budget cuts will most likely be felt in the form of snow removal and custodial and security cuts, the administration must fight for the university community. It can no longer just ride the wave and not fight for providing the best education and services possible for students.

The administration must be more proactive and give the legislators reasons why they shouldn’t slash the U’s budget to help them in their decision-making so that the U’s budget is no longer compromised.

Former senator’s alleged DUI tainted democratic process

The Utah State Legislature will begin its annual session next week. Agenda items are diverse as our elected representatives will discuss and vote on all the issues that impact the state.

There are many good people who work tirelessly in our legislative branches to partner with our communities and businesses to build prosperity. However, gross violations of state ethics and abuse of power are all too common.

Last week, former State Senate Majority Leader Sheldon Killpack was arrested on suspicion of drunken driving and resigned his Senate seat the next day. Ironically, Killpack was a vocal opponent of drunken driving, and he spearheaded ethics reforms. In fact, Killpack’s father was killed by a drunken driver, and all this didn’t seem to matter to him as he took the wheel, inebriated.

Killpack refused to take a breath test, but was forced to take a warranted blood test with results that could take up to a month to determine how drunk he was while driving. He was driving with a lobbyist and former Illinois congressman who had previously pled guilty to inducing his opponent to drop out of a state treasurer race.

It would seem that these two power-hungry politicians were more obsessed with the prestige of their position than serving the people who elected them. At least they both had enough decency to resign and show post-disgrace respect for the offices they held, after making terrible decisions.

Ethics is the core of a successfully functioning democracy. Unfortunately, personal integrity no longer seems to be a strong-enough motive for elected officials to make decisions in the best interest of their constituents. Lobbyists and political machines get in the way too easily and often, and the overall public consensus is a feeling of frustration that their elected officials don’t listen and don’t vote as the voice of the people. This is a broken democracy.

Although it can only be measured at the polls as a steadily decreasing number, not all citizens are exercising their right to vote in elections. Simply put, many feel voting isn’t worth the time because their representatives react solely to money and their respective political machines.

This perverse and disappointing reality of America’s democratic process is a cheap imitation of what the Founding Fathers worked so hard to build and our nation’s military sacrificed to protect. History shows that in these times, radical economic and political change occurs. Change is definitely on the horizon, the uncertainty of which will most likely be an unwelcome visitor.

Questionable methods for health care bill: Lawsuit against government reform deserves attention

Health care coverage in America is expensive. Insurance companies operate unregulated, and coverage is often inaccessible to the people who really need it, according to Nancy Pelosi. With this fuzzy belief to guide them, the federal government is debating what the changes should be.

Just before Christmas, the Senate passed an admittedly imperfect health care reform bill that President Barack Obama hailed as historic, even though much of the financial burden will be dumped onto the states. Ardent listeners of Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck are calling the $871 billion Democratic health care bill catastrophic for Americans, as the high costs will compromise future generations.

Beyond the cost and the uncertainty of actual health care reform, the bill is particularly distasteful because of the way it was passed in Congress. In fact, Utah is prepared to join 10 other states in a lawsuit against the federal government. The attorneys general said there are constitutional questions and parts of the bill that smell of corruption.

According to the CNN/Opinion Research Corporation, the health care reform bill is viewed unfavorably by 56 percent of Americans. House and Senate Democrats didn’t let that get in the way of their determination to ignore the voice of the people and force the bill through with majority votes.

Liberals had to abandon a government-run public option. Deals were made with moderates such as the “Nebraska Compromise” in which Nebraska was exempt from paying anywhere from $45 to $100 million in Medicaid bills in exchange for Sen. Ben Nelson’s vote. Louisiana got a similar deal in additional federal funding. It makes you question the integrity of our leaders when these kinds of deals are made.

The constitutional questions surrounding the bill revolve around the mandate for states to enforce the laws and the requirement that every American has to buy health insurance. This line of thinking follows the law that every driver must have auto insurance, though there seems to be missing qualifiers for the health debate, not to mention thousands of uninsured drivers.

Although many Americans believe the bill will effect immediate change—such as insurers bewginning to accept customers with pre-existing conditions—the reality is, most of the benefits won’t come for another several years. This covers hidden costs and erroneously shows a balanced budget. In our great democracy, ideas and proposals should be scrutinized by the public and voted on in the open. Transparency was a campaign promise by the Obama administration, but recent actions show that day-to-day dealings have been anything but open.

Utah and the 10 other conservative states should be commended for challenging the bill’s threat to constitutional freedoms and the corrupt way it was forced to a vote.