Categories

I’d hoped to write about a WSJ’s op-ed about the bloated spending at the U of M before this but that’s what happens when you’re recovering from surgery. This WSJ article says some things that can’t be overlooked. They must be put into context. Here’s an example:

Like many public colleges, the University of Minnesota went on a spending spree over the past decade, paid for by a steady stream of state money and rising tuition. Officials didn’t keep close tabs on their payroll as it swelled beyond 19,000 employees, nearly one for every 3½ students.

It’s important that we put this information in the proper political context, which I did in this post:

Higher Education Chairwoman Sandy Pappas, DFL-St. Paul, said college and university funding is far from enough. “We are starving higher education,” she said.

Under the Senate targets, public education would get the most of $1.3 billion in new money: $498 million in the next two years. Following would be higher education ($296 million) and health and human services ($245 million). Other parts of the budget would get relatively insignificant increases considering the total state spending will top $34 billion over the next two years.

Pappas predicted existing plans to increase public college and university tuition about 4 percent each of the next two years may jump to twice that much.

At the time, a $296,000,000 increase for higher education represented an 11.3% increase. At the very time that the U of M’s spending was skyrocketing, DFL legislators like Sen. Pappas were complaining that higher education spending wasn’t enough.

In that environment, what incentive did the U of M lobbyists have in asking for more fiscally responsible spending increases?

Fast forward to 2013, where the DFL is attempting to create the image that they’re fiscally responsible. The people that spent like drunken sailors are attempting to tell Minnesota taxpayers that they’ll reject their past ways today.

When the final higher education budget is passed, let’s see how many reforms are included in it. Let’s see if the DFL eliminates funding for the U of M’s and MNSCU’s lobbyists. Let’s see if they’ll cap the amount of money universities can spend on Taj Majal buildings like the STSS on the U of M campus:

Here’s a glimpse at the inside of the STSS:

That’s a pretty lavish building for a university that’s getting starved by the legislature.

4 Responses to “DFL’s war against taxpayers, U of M edition”

  • Chad Q says:

    For the DFL, there will never, ever be enough money spent on education even if the evidence points to the contrary. If the price of gas and food had increased as much as the price of a so called education has, the people would be outraged yet most just say “it’s for the kids” and go on their merry way.

  • walter hanson says:

    Chad:

    Lets not forget that it’s voter recruitment money that is being spent. The professors and the line staff are told by people if the DFL doesn’t have the governor’s office let alone the legislature their salaries won’t grow and their jobs might be cut.

    In the mean time to get the votes of the young people they will say they care by spending more money on grants and loans instead of trying to contain costs.

    Walter Hanson
    Minneapolis, MN

  • Jethro says:

    OMG!! The pictures truly tell the story. Is anyone in the legislature going to rein in this foolishness?

  • eric z says:

    What is STSS?

    Which campus is at?

    In finding fault with the system, is your complaint focused mainly on the TC campus, or the outlying efforts besides the TC campus, its professional science and engineering graduate programs, its medical and dentistry programs?

    The TC campus is the flagship, and if any of the fleet needs cutting, I would argue that keeping the flagship shipshape is priority numero uno; all else secondary and subject to debate.

Leave a Reply