The Seattle Times today reports on a proposal that would allow the University of Washington to become more like a private university, allowing tuition to rise towards market rates, while dramatically increasing need-based financial aid.
The idea would be to increase financial aid to students on a sliding scale based on income to help offset a large increase in tuition.
There are skeptics wary of such a move, but university officials pitch it as a kind of Robin Hood plan, where the families of rich students pay more to help subsidize tuition for students from middle- and low-income families.
I have long supported such measures — indeed I think it is inevitable — but I need to correct a mischaracterization in the above statement. Right now, taxpayers subsidize all students equally… even the children of the wealthy. Under the proposal, it is not fair to say that “the families of rich students pay more to help subsidize tuition for students from middle- and low-income families;” rather, the rich will simply be less subsidized than the poor. No tuition covers the full cost of a college education, and all students are subsidized to some degree, through taxes, endowment, research grants and other revenues.
I expect that many will have a knee-jerk reaction against this proposal, as low tuition is uniformly appealing. But Washington state is in the midst of an education funding crisis, where we simply do not have enough four-year slots to meet the growing needs of our expanding population. If taxpayers and legislators are unwilling to pay the cost of expanding our current system of across-the-board subsidies, then means-testing is really the only solution. The alternative is to let our university system decline, while denying access to an ever-growing number of applicants. This would not only be disastrous for our children, but in the long run, a disaster for our economy as well.
Another nit to pick in the article is that the reporters didn’t include comments from Reps. Fred Jarrett (Mercer Island) or Skip Priest (Federal Way), Republican legislators who deserve a lot of credit for a similar proposal that was part of their broader, education package, HB 1434. Due to the partisan nature of the previous legislative session, and the sponsors’ minority status, the bill got little consideration. Gov. Christine Gregoire sounds serious about exploring the UW tuition proposal, and I hope her education task force considers the entirety of the forward-thinking Jarrett/Priest bill… she may be surprised to find some strong bipartisan support.
Gregoire said she knows some lawmakers are worried about the idea, but said she wouldn’t endorse any approach that reduces access or hurts the middle class.
Still, something needs to be done, she said. “When I talk to companies about coming to Washington state and staying in Washington, not one of them has talked to me about the B&O [business and occupation] tax. Every employer has talked to me about education and whether the state is committed to education.
“We can’t allow budgets that are being consumed by skyrocketing health-care costs and unfunded mandates to lead our institutions to mediocrity. That’s what I see, stepping back, is happening.”
It’s comforting to know that Gov. Gregoire clearly understands one of our state’s most pressing problems. She’s got three years and five months to prove to voters that she can fix it.
You are right; Chrissie has ONLY 3.5 yrs left.
Thanks on the communist post. Why not make all things I pay taxes on tied to income when I need the service. “Hi, I need a fire truck, yeah, i live in Broadmoor/Mercer Island/etc, ok, so its free for Central district, but I need Visa to pay $100 for the truck to come to my fancy house?”
Lets go the other way; people paying most taxes should get free tuition; people w/ kids in private secondary schools should get UW tuition wagers
Goldy–
Aren’t you the least bit curious about the current finances of the University???
It is a prime example of an elitist bureaucracy out of control.
Where is the current money going???
My belief is that with all the taxpayer dollars invested in R&D we should be to the point where education is FREE for those who qualify academically. Why isn’t it??? Because the academians have cut one of the fatest of hogs. No one seems to seriously question the costs or if all the revenues are really hitting the books.
The UW needs a serious performance audit. They have spent a fortune on their facilities…but who is really paying. The UW has tremendous contributions received every year. They are a PUBLIC University. Where is the accountability?
All you have to do is look at the financial fiasco the UW Medical is embroiled in. Massive overbilling and FRAUD!
Virtually no consequences.
Taxpayers are getting ripped off Goldy.
Before you do your typical knee-jerk re-distribution of wealth schtick…how about a careful analysis of revenues (are we getting all we are entitled too or are the academians “skimming”), expenditures and capital improvements.
Left wets its pants at any redistribution scheme (UW) or chokes at any non-redistribution plan (soc sec)
I’m at the U (a faculty member) and I’m on the faculty senate, so though I personally do not feel that I’m underpaid, I hear the pain of those on upper campus (I’m at the medical school). So, I understand where Emmert is coming from with this proposal. And, the point of the proposal is to benefit me and my colleagues. And I think we deserve it. UW has become a truly world class university in the last couple of decades, but has done so while relying on people’s love of Seattle. That’s not going to work forever. We milk it for all we can when we recruit faculty, but you know, other places have their charms, too.
This proposal, might, in the end, be the only way to keep UW at the top. But, I hate it. I hate changing a public university into a private one (which is what this does). I think the dynamics of university education is changing from when I was a student applying for schools. But, when I did, I knew that I had an affordable backup, my state university. And, that meant affordable on my own terms. I was middle class, and I knew I was going to get aid, but the aid you get isn’t necesarily the aid you want. I’ve heard plenty of stories of folks who just couldn’t see taking on major loans to pay for their education to know that having to pay, even with the promise of aid, limits people’s options.
Right now, UW is balancing it’s books with the Ranier effect. (that is, faculty take lower pay in order to be able to see mount ranier). I know that can’t last forever. And, from a faculty members point of view, making UW into Harvard isn’t a terrible thing. And, since we don’t have a Harvard in Washington state, maybe it won’t be a bad thing for the state. The other universities here, like Western Wash, who don’t seem to want to become Harvard can be the real state universities. Maybe we can make a flagship private university out of UW (since the state doesn’t have a flagship private university, like Stanford, Harvard, or even an Oberlin).
OK, enough for now.
I have been concerned that over the past several decades the state colleges are becoming too expensive for middle class people to send their children to. The reason these institutions of higher learning were originally formed was to ensure that higher education was available for as many people as possible, not just the rich. At Harvard there are government funded special education courses that give free tutoring to the “knuckle-head kids” of the rich.
But that’s not the point I want to Make. I’m with Righton and Cynical on this. Where the hell IS all that money going? Why should public supported colleges need so much in tuition $$$$?
Goldy
You obviously do not have a clue how financial aid works nowadays. ALL aid is based on a federal form now called FAFSA. Even if you manage to get something based on merit, they count that against what FAFSA says you should get. The poor already get a free ride …
I highly resent and disagree with your comment about the poor getting a free ride when it is clearly the ultra rich that are getting a free ride. Don’t you think that those government research monies that go to private universities are a form of the poor subsidizing the rich?And what do we get from yhe rich except more whining about how they need more gov. subsidies for themselves in the form of tax breaks? Just when I think you might have an ounce of sense, you make a “the poor are getting a free ride” comment. If they’re getting a free ride, why are they poor?
Mr. Cynical @ 2
Not one single “LEFTIST PINHEAD” in the whole post.
Now I have seen everything!
Goldy, I have to agree with your right-wing luntic posters on this. I deal with the UW on lots of issues (most recently their little germ warfare lab proposal), and at the risk of oversimplifying the issue – FUCK THAT SHIT.
As far as I’m concerned, Locke made a big mistake giving the Regents the authority to set undergraduate tuitions, and it’s proposals like this that unfortunately prove me right.
I can’t believe it but, I think I agree with Lucy at 4 above
Per the Seattle Times article over the last 10 years:
Inflation up 20%
State per capita income up 51%
UW and WAZZU tuition up 79%
Where the hell is the money going? Do they teach fiscal responsibility and accountability there?
The Rich already pay the most taxes, recieve diddly squatt in financial aide and now they’re expected to pay higher tuition as well? If tuition doubles I expect many of the rich will go to private schools and then they’ll have to find a different way to bilk the rich.
We can make it public policy that all gov’t. research $$$$$ go to public universities.
@1
“Lets go the other way; people paying most taxes should get free tuition; people w/ kids in private secondary schools should get UW tuition wagers”
Spoken like a true Republican.
@1 (continued)
On second thought, Righton, I’ve decided I like your plan. Well, just the first part of it — “people paying most taxes should get free tuition.” “People” meaning students, and their parents’ taxes don’t count. In other words, students who don’t have parents paying their way and have to work for their schooling would get free or reduced tuition, while the kids who get tuition, frat dues, new cars, and beer money provided by Daddy will pay full bore.
I like it.
Without the University of Washington, Seattle would be just another hick west coast town. UW brings into the state economy vastly more than what it costs. Whatever the state legislature gives the University is an investment in the state economy. In fact the return on investment is many times greater than if the state put that money into Microsoft stock. Just in terms of the amount of Federal funds brought into the state for research and development we’re talking several times more than what the state gives UW.
UW is one of the top ranking universities in the world and in the US. It has maintained that despite going through a long dry stretch until this year when the state legislators finally recognized its worth to the state. UW got over the dry stretch because many of the faculty were willing to accept lesser salaries (lesser than what they would have been able to get at other universities) because Seattle is such a great place to live.
So salaries are generally lower at UW compared to other universities and the amount of state money it gets is less than what it brings into the state. The citizens of Washington are getting a great deal whatever they’re paying.
9
One reason tuition has risen faster than inflation is because state funding for the universities has dropped tremendously over the past two decades as successive legislatures grappled with budget shortfalls and competing priorities. There are other reasons, but the state contribution to UW’s and WSU’s costs has fallen dramatically.
But the question still remains as to why the rate of inflation at the public universities is dramatically higher than in the rest of the economy. Where’s all the money going? What’s it being spent on?
I really want to know where the money is going. When I was a young teacher and still somewhat innocent about the real world, I noticed that the school district I worked at had an entire building filled with nothing but brand new bus tires. When I began to ask about this I was informed that it was none of my business and if I valued my job , Iwould not ask about the building full of tires anymore. I wonder, figuratively speaking, how many buildings full of tires that there are at the UW?
The Seattle Times article says that Washington is 46th out of 50 states in the percentage of its young residents who are pursuing an undergraduate degree. Washington presumably ranks lower on this scale than such historical bastions of literacy and culture such as Mississippi, Arkansas and Louisiana.
Now Christine Gregoire wants to double tuition at the University of Washington and other state institutions? What an assinine proposal. Rich people like Gregoire — whose eldest daughter just graduated from Harvard — can presumably afford the tuition increase.
Poor and middle class students will have to borrow a helluva lot more in student loans to make up the difference. Since these loan programs have limits, some of this money will have to be in unsubsidized loans that have higher interest rates and also accrue interest while one is still attending college.
Many of these people won’t bother to go to college in the first place, since they will be facing tens of thousands more in student loans to pay off (much at higher interest rates) when they finally finish college. Washington should drop to 50th place in higher education attendance.
The Democrat Party in Washington is truly the party of the rich.
Ronsch@13–
You are merely repeated the Academian Snort and Sneer (ASS) Bullshit about underpaid staff and how wonderful the University is for our economy etc.
Do you work for the University??? Be honest now!
WHERE THE FUCK IS ALL THE MONEY GOING???
We need a big-time independent performance audit…..NOW!
This is one area where the Right-wing “bottom-feeders” and Left-Wing bottom-feeders pad their bank accounts at the expense of students of ALLLLLLLL financial backgrounds.
It’s a little fucking club of assholes who have lost touch with the fact it is a State University. The Regents are merely PUPPETS of the establishment. They are the Head ASSHOLES!
Here is the bureaucratic salary game. University “B” bitches that they are underpaid in comparison to University “A” (right after University “A” gets big raises because of University “Z” which just got raises because of University “Y” and on & on & on.
Big Companies suck off the technology R&D with these so called “Professors” rewarded with fat consulting contracts (many after the leave academia).
This cozy little club of bureacrats, big companies and “educators” all get wealthy at the expense of TUITION!!!
Fuck these Assholes…starting with the Board of Regents, the President of the UW and all the way down the line.
So, does anyone here have actual figures on the budgets for UW and WSU? How fast have overall expenditures at the universities been growing? If Roger Rabbit’s right at 14, a lot of the tuition increases are just necessary to make up for a drop in state funding for higher education. So who’s got the numbers?
Criminy, Mr. C., I understand that you detest everyone and everything in the field of public education, but your tirades are getting over-the-top ridiculous.
Are you condemning the free market system? UW is a top research university. It pulls in a vast amount of federal research dollars for this state because it has top researchers. Top researchers won’t keep coming to UW (indeed, will leave) if other top universities (and up-and-coming ones) are willing to pay market salaries and UW (i.e., the state of Washington) isn’t. And then the research dollars will follow the researchers and top professors elsewhere, and things will head downhill.
So you can deal with the free market and agree we have to pay top professors and researchers what they’re worth (perhaps with a discount for getting to live in such a great part of the country), or you can rave like a left-wing lunatic about “the establishment” and “the bureaucratic salary game.” Which will it be?
P.S.: You want to save money in salaries at the UW, take a look at what the football coach is making. How is paying that market-based salary (for a winning football team, that brings in money) different from paying professors’ market-based salaries (for winning research grants, that bring in money)?
Holy SHIT, there is a lot of misunderstanding of UW on this thread!
As Ronsch @ 13 points out, the UW gives a hell of a lot back to the State for the very modest investment the state puts into it.
The information on revenue and expenses is readily available on the web so, before you rag on the UW, and spew more bullshit, take a few minutes to get the facts. The annual report is a start (http://www.washington.edu/admi.....rt2004.pdf –page 20 has some nice pie charts for people who don’t like numbers and words). A full-blown financial statement begins on page 30.
Here are some facts:
The State operating funding is only 11% of revenues, $310 million in 2004. In 2002, the State provided $344 million in operating funding. At the same time, instructional costs have gone up from $558 million to $595 million. Tuition currently brings in 11% of total revenue ($304 million in 2004). In 2002, tuition income was $250 million.
Now do you understand why tuition is going up? If not, do a little simple math.
By the way, most of the state operating revenue and tuition goes directly for instructional expenses. At that low fraction of the total budget (11%), the UW is practically a private university (and there are people within the UW who feel it would be much better off as a private university). And, as Roger Rabbit points out, the State has gradually shrunk this amount even as enrollment goes up (10 years ago: 34,755 students, now 39,263 students) and the UW gets bigger (10 years ago 13,900 sq ft, now 17,500 sq ft).
The biggest single category of income at the UW is external grants and contracts, amounting to $896 million dollars (31% of total revenue). This amount is doubled from 10 years ago. Grants and contracts typically come from the Federal government in the form of research grants, but they also come from private foundations. Most of the money arrives from out of state, and a huge chunk is pumped into the local State economy.
The fact is, the UW consistently ranks as the top public university for bringing in external grants and contracts. They typically rank 3rd for U.S. universities in federal grant-getting overall (MIT and Johns Hopkins are private universities that bring in more grant monies). UW recently is ranked second (behind John Hopkins) in NIH funding (here is the 2003 list http://grants1.nih.gov/grants/.....to100.html).
Aside from the massive amounts of money it pumps into the state economy, there are the educational benefits of having your kid taught by some of the top scientists in the world. There are also the technology spin-offs in the form of new businesses, having a pool of highly educated people that largely remain in the state (promoting high-tech business), and the advantages of having a leading medical center nearby.
I’d also like to know why we should believe Gov. Gregoire that that’s what the business community is asking, instead of why our taxes are so high.
I believe her now about as much as I believed her when she said during the Gov. debates that she’d only support a voter-approved gas tax increase.
Mr Cynical, let apply that reasoning to the military in the federal budget. In 1962 (from http://frwebgate1.access.gpo.gov/, the federal government spent 50,111 million, while last year they spent 437,116. Where is that money going. Since I do not know, it must be being wasted, and I suspect all those fat cat military people are getting rich. Especially since they all get high paying jobs after they are no longer in the budget. Lets stop paying them anything at all till we get a full accounting.
I dont actually believe that, but that is the very logic you are applying to UW. I think that looking at tuition alone is a fools game. Tuition is only part of the operating costs of any university, and as funding goes down tuition must go up. This rate has zero to do with inflation. You need to look at the actual university expenditures and compare THOSE with inflation.
BTW, the financial report for UW is available at http://www.washington.edu/admi.....chive.html
You know, that took me all of 10 min to find, it was in no way hidden. Some of those reports on that page are from independant performance audits. Given the tenor of the posts on both this web site and on uSP over the last month or so, I am really starting wonder if anyone here bothers to actually check any facts at all or if y’all are just parroting whatever the last thing you heard someone say was.
re my own post thats not shown up yet, my apologies to dj who clearly DID do his homework before posting.
But still, why is the rate of inflation so much higher at the university than in the rest of the economy? Why does the same dollar have less bang at the UW than everywhere else? Someone is getting paid a lot more for something than they should. What other explanation could there be?
Liberals talk about subsidizing the UW like Conservatives talk about giving Boeing more tax breaks. Let me explain it to you in terms that are easily understood by everyone: What would it be worth to you if you manufactured toilet paper and you could sell a lot of it all at once to the UW? I think you’re all smart enough to get the picture.
Things like that are the ONLY explanation for the cost disparity. The UW is a trough of welfare for business large and small. I wonder who you have to know and how much it costs to get into that exclusive domain of cushy supply and demand? If someone turned over some rocks I am fairly certain some bugs are going to be scurrying for cover.
nice info dj, please post your conclusion
Nobody denying value of a major public university. Not sure UW the best, just gets a lot of fed funds (having gone to big funded schools and small less funded its not aximatic size means great education).
But how do they spend their money is part of the question. New Pres or Chancellor making $1mm or so seems steep (you libs should agree on that, and yeah its worse to pay coaches more)
I think public universities ought to be a) affordably priced, b) encouraging all to strive to attend, c) augmented by good state or communicty colleges for those less able or having to live at home (can’t all quit and move to seattle), ….but I see 2 bad trends out there a) charge more for those who could/might go to a private school and b) try to ethnically balance the place.
Any smart guys out there (smart alecks) on how to mash this topic together with Garfields 140 freshmen w 4.0’s or 44 valedictorians….
dj @ 21
Federal money going to UW didn’t come from out of state; it came from our federal taxes getting sent back to this state. Its our money, not theirs.
Thanks, dj. “Now do you understand why tuition is going up? If not, do a little simple math.”
Here, let me help. For those of you who can read numbers but aren’t good about counting them, here’s what dj pointed out:
decrease in UW funding from Washington state:
2002: $344 million
2004: $310 million
difference: ($34 million) or -10%
increase in UW instructional costs (for an increasing number of students):
2002: $558 million
2004: $595 million
difference: $37 million or +6.6%
Total shortfall from those two factors: $34 million + $37 million = $71 million
UW income from tuition:
2002: $250 million
2004: $304 million
difference: $54 million or +22%
But $71 million – $54 million = a $17 million gap in funding.
Now, it’s certainly possible the University could raise $17 million from outside sources (alumni, federal research grants, etc.), but let’s drop the notion that rising tuition = prolifigate university spending. A 6.6% rise in instructional costs over 3 years, including inflation and the costs of educating more students, isn’t drastic.
But, when that rise in costs is combined with a cut in state funding, even raising tuition significantly (remember it’s only 11% of the University’s income) isn’t enough to have made up the difference.
So, dj, thanks again for the UW numbers. Maybe now we can have a rational discussion about tuition, state funding and the costs of running our state universities.
Heh, that’s over 2 years, not 3. Silly me.
You know who they ought to hike the tuition on?
1. Frat boys. These assheads who drive their Lexus SUVs to campus and take up two handicapped spots should be paying at least $40,000 a year each.
2. Foreigners. Obviously $19,000 is too little because there is still more demand than supply. I know from whence I speak: Next to my old school are some kinda nice (but very expensive) apartments that orientals and Saudis pay $1,100 a month to rent. These are often the same people as (1). They should be paying $50,000 a year at least to go.
This is a good idea for the 4-year institutions.
But I think community & technical colleges should charge one low rate. I also think the property tax should be traded for the income tax to help fund the latter.
DamnageD @ 26
My conclusion is mostly that my blogging time has expired—must get more work done. :-)
Seriously, though, I was trying to point out:
(1) why tuition has gone up so much (because the total State subsidy has gone down while enrollment has gone up and, instructional costs have gone up (more students, investment in instructional technology, inflation)
(2) that the modest investment by the State in the UW is paid off in a number of ways, financially (employment, bringing money into the state, sales tax, patent and other intellectual property royalties), through products (educational services, medical services, research contracts and products, extension services), and side-effects (new techchnology spinoff institutes and businesses, businesses tapping the pool of graduates).
There are also the benefits to Washington, America, and humanity that come from the basic and applied research that goes on at the UW. It is too much to expect some of the wingers to count that into the equation, though, since they cannot envision the direct benefits.
Mr. Cynical asks if I work for the University. Actually I work for a software development company which could not exist here without the University because of the access to its library and to the expertise of its students and faculty. I suspect that many, many businesses in Seattle and around the state owe their existence here to the university.
The library is a huge thing for me. I have online access to the world’s literature on just about any topic. For me it’s statistics/econometrics. I’m able to keep up with the latest developments from my home where I work through the university library’s online journals collection. Without that library though I wouldn’t be able to work here. I’d probably be in San Jose (and I thank the fates every day for my not having to live there).
I’m also an Affiliate Professor in the Department of Sociology (which is kind of an honorary position which pays no salary and places no demands on my time) and I’m on their Board of Advisors. I’m in a good position to tell you that indeed the university is thinking of itself more and more as a private institution. In the last few years the new faculty positions in our department have been endowed positions, in other words, someone has donated enough money to the department that the interest from its investment is enough to pay the salary for the position. The focus in most departments that I know about is now on raising money from alums just like private universities do. I really don’t know what the implications are of that trend, but it is what is happening.
Complaints about productivity at the university are misplaced. Everyone I know there works like hell. It’s publish or perish there, and anyone who thinks that’s a cakewalk needs to get some education. On the faculty in my department is the most highly cited mathematician in the world over the last ten years. He didn’t get there sitting around the local Starbucks.
Seattle and the state of Washington would be getting a tremendous deal with UW at twice the price.
righton @ 28
“Federal money going to UW didn’t come from out of state; it came from our federal taxes getting sent back to this state. Its our money, not theirs.”
Indeed, some small fraction of the federal grant monies originates in Washington and is paid to the federal government. But, if faculty at the UW do not go out and get those dollars, then the money will go to universities in other states.
Also, don’t forget. The majority of those grant dollars are for actual research products. Grants are not handouts. They are awarded only after a highly competitive application process. The U.S. government targets the money for areas of research (sometimes broadly, sometimes very narrowly), so somebody is going to be awarded the money to do the research.
OK Assholes! I will not comment on this issue, because frankly, I am pretty ignorant about it. I will just learn from you all.
BUT! For those who insist of posting URLs that are longer than the screen size, thus widening the screen and requiring side scrolling.
USE THIS http://tinyurl.com/
It will take your hellasciously long url and make it as small as Pudster’s penis. And that is small!
Here’s why the GOP is against public education. They don’t want smart people at the polls. Look at the red states. They have a lower college-degree ratio than the blue states. That should tell you something. Fools vote GOP. The GOP fears educated people so they are against public schools. After all, in their perfect world, everyone works for WalMart. Need an 8th grade education for that.
Come on now… What is “rich” around here anyway. $100K/year is just getting by.
I wonder how many illegals will take advantage of the sliding scale.
UW is useless for most locals anyway. The grade requirements to get in are artificially high because UW is the only game in town.
As far as being educated by world-class scientists, give me a break. Nobel prize winners make the worst professors. (They may be good for grad students who are mostly foreign students anyway.)
Undergrads need professors who know how to teach. Let the high priced “world-class” experts go somewhere else.
(I f’ing hated UW… I had better instruction at Seattle Central)
The UW turned its back on Washington students when it stopped automatically admitting students with a Community College degree, thereby cutting the nuts off the academic end of the Community College system. The UW also has a dirty little secret: The UW prefers to admit international students because they pay the FULL COST of education (not just out-of-state tuition). Its a cash cow for them, and why would they admit some poor Black student from Sumner when they can get more money by admitting an international student.
Oh, and as far as building a better Washington goes, the UW building program is doing just fine.
What does what they spent and how much they’re getting now have to do with the rate of inflation being higher at universities than elsewhere in the economy?
Ted Smith @ 39
“The UW turned its back on Washington students when it stopped automatically admitting students with a Community College degree, thereby cutting the nuts off the academic end of the Community College system.”
Try again, dipshit. The UW was forced to eliminate the community college automatic admissions (which did have a GPA requirement attached) because the State cut it instructional budget without raising tuition to offset the revenue loss.
“The UW prefers to admit international students because they pay the FULL COST of education (not just out-of-state tuition).”
Come on, quit making up xenophobic shit. The UW only has “resident” and “non-resident” tuitions. Here are the rates:
http://www.washington.edu/stud.....rates.html
headless lucy @ 40
“What does what they spent and how much they’re getting now have to do with the rate of inflation being higher at universities than elsewhere in the economy?”
What the hell are you talking about. It is nonsense to discuss “inflation” at a university. I think you are asking why tuition increased more than inflation? If so, the answer is that tuition increased to offset revenue loss and, to a certain extent, an investment in instructional technology.
As has been pointed out here, the State has been gradually reducing their contribution to the UW. That either means raising tuition or reducing enrollment. The UW has chosen to not decrease enrollment (although they have capped growth in enrollment), this means that tuition has had to increase.
The UW budget reports are readily available (links above) if you need to work with the numbers. . . .
21
You forgot to mention that University Hospital (which also operates Harborview) and University Physicians are a major health care provider, and the region’s only major trauma center.
23
Bill, it’s worse than that. Our motley collection of useless PINHEAD RIGHT WING TROLLS are a bunch of liars.
Huskey93 @ 38,
“UW is useless for most locals anyway. The grade requirements to get in are artificially high because UW is the only game in town.”
That only makes it useless for stupid locals, dummy. The GPA requirements reflect demand in conjunction with enrollment limits.
“As far as being educated by world-class scientists, give me a break. Nobel prize winners make the worst professors. (They may be good for grad students who are mostly foreign students anyway.)”
This is somewhat true. Some faculty are best working with Graduate students or advanced undergraduates. But, research training is one of the strengths at UW that is hard to get elsewhere (other than another peer institution). Most faculty in the “Nobel Prize class” don’t teach many low-level undergraduate courses. They tend to have much of their salary paid for from research grants to conduct research, and the courses they do teach are typically high-level undergraduate and graduate courses.
On the other hand, there are many active researchers who are outstanding instructors. Part of this is a selection process: faculty only get tenure if (1) they are outstanding researchers (even if they are not great undergraduate instructors) or (2) very good researchers AND very good instructors. The rest go away after 5 or 6 years.
“Undergrads need professors who know how to teach. Let the high priced “world-class” experts go somewhere else.”
As I pointed out, undergrads usually do get professors who know how to teach AND they have access to the superstars for advanced training in research. You are just plain ignorant if you think that (1) the only thing the university should do is teach and (2) if you believe there are not big payoffs to teaching from having a world class research going on.
“(I f’ing hated UW… I had better instruction at Seattle Central)”
No shit. . . but you’re a fucking punk. If you hate the UW, then change your screen handle, asshole!
Ronsch@34-
So your Software Development Company exists because of the UW Library. How much does your company pay the UW for utilizing that Library. That Library was developed with the use of taxpayer dollars just like many other R&D products. The problem is some folks are utilizing this R&D and paying what????????
The other issue dj and others neglect is all the R&D over the decades. If the UW is so successful we should be reaping huge benefits that help subsidize tuition. It’s almost as if the R&D is a NON-PROFIT organization sponsored by the UW that has right-wingers and left-wingers feeding at the trough….and it’s the upcoming students that must pay higher & higher tuition.
Listen folks….these so-called UW performance audits essentially rationalize the bureacratic “shell-game”. If the UW cannot generate revenue from all the decades of R&D that subsidizes tuitions, then I question exactly how “successful” they are.
Cynical, are you really that stupid? Ronsch’s software company exists and pays taxes because of that UW R&d. Everyone in Seattle (and in fact western washington) get a reduced cost medical care because of that R&D. Companies come here and pay taxes because of that R&D.
Did you think this through or are you just typing what you heard someone say yesterday.
So long as the state continues to lower how much we are willing to contribute to that, the only recourse UW has is to raise rates.
I guess there really is no solution you would entertain Cynical. You reject any audit, these WERE independant.
Your post seems to be the now common republican refrain of “increase services, but I am not going to pay for it”, which oddly enough most folks seem to grow out of by the age of 15.
If the University of Washington Medical center can steal multi-millions with overbilling schemes, don’t kid yourselves about what the rest of that institution is capable of.
Too little serious oversight for too long.
Underqualified Regents.
It’s an attaboy, attagirl club.
Look how long Barbara Hedges stuck around and what they did to Rick Neuheisel.
Folks get mighty complacent with “ACADEMIA”…and that is a huge mistake.
Now which shell is that pea under????
37
They also don’t want smart kids from families of modest means getting a good education and competing against their kids for the best jobs. They want to protect their advantaged position in society by eliminating competition from upward strivers.
47
Cynical is against ANYTHING public. Period. He is the essence of the Private Sector True Believer. Privatize and outsource every goddam thing including government itself. Cynical is a government-hater par excellence.
Are you surprised that he works for the BIAW? (Building Industry Association of Washington) The outfit that financed Rossi’s campaign and election contest. Guess where BIAW gets virtually all of its money? By skimming employer rebates of L & I taxes paid for injured workers.
Mr. Cynical,
“So your Software Development Company exists because of the UW Library. How much does your company pay the UW for utilizing that Library. That Library was developed with the use of taxpayer dollars just like many other R&D products. The problem is some folks are utilizing this R&D and paying what????????”
It is possible that his company pays a subscription for electronic access to the UW. In any case, the library is open to you, too. If you do not pay for electronic access, you just have to go to campus for access to the same stuff.
”The other issue dj and others neglect is all the R&D over the decades. If the UW is so successful we should be reaping huge benefits that help subsidize tuition. It’s almost as if the R&D is a NON-PROFIT organization sponsored by the UW that has right-wingers and left-wingers feeding at the trough….and it’s the upcoming students that must pay higher & higher tuition.”
Thank you for bringing that up. In fact, the “R&D” income does subsidize the instructional mission of the UW in many ways. But, R&D money primarily comes into the UW for getting research done! In other words, grant funding is awarded to researchers primarily for producing specific research products. As it happens, some of this revenue does subsidize educational products, as well. Look at the percentages of revenue and expenditures:
(1) Research
INCOME: Grant and contracts: 31%
EXPENDITURES: Research: 21%
(2) Instruction
INCOME: State Operating Revenue: 11%
INCOME: Tuition: 11%
EXPENDITURES: Instruction: 22%
EXPENDITURES: Scholarships and Fellowships: 4%
EXPENDITURES: Academic support: 7%
Research income (so-called Grant Overhead) covers some of the deficit in instructional expenditures, but it also covers a big chunk of of shared infrastructure:
EXPENDITURES: Operations and Plant Maintenance (6%)
EXPERDITURES: Institutional Support (4%)
”Listen folks….these so-called UW performance audits essentially rationalize the bureacratic “shell-game”. If the UW cannot generate revenue from all the decades of R&D that subsidizes tuitions, then I question exactly how “successful” they are.”
Cynical, I though you were an accountant? So read the fucking financial statements already, Sherlock! You will see that the research income does pull its weight and subsidizes much of the shared operating costs.
dj–
Who paid for those audits???
Who oversaw the auditors??
Check this out:
http://www.soundpolitics.com/archives/004629.html
This is what your beloved UW Bureaucracy is capable of…including cover-ups.
dj…they also had “audits” and hid the pea pretty will for a long time.
Where there is smoke, there is fire.
If the UW can pay a $35 million fine for overbilling and not hold anyone accountable….they are capable of even worse.
WAKE-UP DJ!!!!!
The bottom line is our state’s higher education system can’t accomodate a growing college-age population and qualified students are being turned away. Education is vital not only to the future earning power of our state’s children but also to our state’s ability to attract businesses. One of Gregoire’s campaign promises was to find a way to expand admissions at our public colleges and community college. She has a task force working on the problem, and is looking for creative ways to accomodate more students. It won’t be easy, because she can’t simply ask the Legislature for more money when our tax system isn’t producing it.
roger; you guys are stupid enough to believe a “task force” does anything other than act as a sounding board. What’s she gonna do, ship out students? Make Central a high quality research U?
Wash state problem is unlike the states it desires to imitate, Michigan, N. Carolina, California, all the action is centered on Univ Ave. Other states have some of there good programs distributed.
Mr. Cynical @ 52
I don’t read uSP, so I am not sure what bullshit is being spread there.
Just like any organization with 27,000 employees and 100,000 customers, there will be a need to monitor and deal with bad employees (and customers).
The UW, as part of their medical school, runs a hospital that looks, for most purposes, like any hospital. If they are overcharging, I strongly suspect it will be fixed. If someone is bilking insurance companies, inappropriately perscribing drugs, violating medical or research ethics, etc., then they should be charged and prosecuted. Likewise, faculty in the university who misappropriate research funds, fake their research, steal, lie, cheat, and fuck alter boys should be charged and prosecuted.
dj; you must know the UW hospital overcharging thing; millions, coverup, etc. (maybe Huenekens did some early intern work there).
righton @ 54
“Wash state problem is unlike the states it desires to imitate, Michigan, N. Carolina, California, all the action is centered on Univ Ave. Other states have some of there good programs distributed.”
Not really, the distribution of population in Washington is very different from that in MI, NC, CA, WI, etc. In fact, the distribution of public Universities in WA is not too bad (3 UW campuses, WSU, WWU, Central, Eastern, Evergreen). What seems to be needed is increased capacity, whether through new campuses (a la California) or expansion of existing campuses. I believe the UW Tacoma and Bothell campuses are part of a future expansion plan (just speculation on my part, though–I’ve never looked into it), and certainly WWU and some of the other campuses can grow with proper support. The UW–Seattle is somewhat more restricted because it is in the middle of a dense urban area.
In any case, the voters of this state seem to have an aversion to investing in public infrastructure like universities, highways, and public transportation just now. It is understandable that following the dot com boom-times people would be reluctant to continue some of this growth. I suspect that capacity could easily be increased if the State wished to do so.
righton@1: “…tuition wagers.” tuition wagers? wagers? what are tuition wagers? I’m not familiar with that term. Did you mean waivers? Just wondering.
Marilyn
righton @ 54
“you must know the UW hospital overcharging thing; millions, coverup, etc.”
I don’t know a whole lot about it. My understanding is that a non-profit physicians group at UW Hospital was billing Medicare for procedures they did not do throughout the 90s. If so, I hope the people involved are taken down.
54
If you knew the first damn thing about Washington’s higher ed system, you would realize the system’s most important component in terms of number of students served, number of people trained for occupations, and number of qualified workers produced for employers, is the community college system.
The Ave. may be the center of the state’s public higher ed universe but it is not the whole universe. You seem to think the various departments, degree programs, and research activities at WSU and the other state universities are of no importance.
You’re full of shit on nearly every topic you post, and you don’t know beans about this topic either. You are one of the 2 or 3 most ignorant posters on HA.
dj–
The University of Washington paid a $35 million fine for overcharging.
Linger longer in your denial dj.
La-La Land is a safe place where everyone is nice to everyone else…while the rip-offs occur and the bureaucracy “circles the wagons”.
Sure the University provides some benefits…
I’m just questioning why all these wonderful research project and investment isn’t lowering the cost of education for our kids.
Isn’t that a fair question???
dj, there was a big scandal over UW doctors overcharging Medicare.
Cynical, the 35 million bucks is chicken feed compared to what Bush is squandering on his losing war in Iraq. Bush goes through that much every 6 hours.
Roger, not responding to the insults…to the issue..
a. I agree community college is hugely valuable. Wonderful topic, but I think on this was abou the big status univ charging more depending on income.
b. Most academics would agree or say the big status universities, that warrant $1mm salaries, high tuition etc have to excel in research, certain departments. Its an old issue. Many states try to even it out, so that all the gold isn’t in one place. I might let my kid go to UW, no way the other school, cuz they just aren’t as good (at least reputation wise).
c. Back to the insults…is your education from a community college which you seem to favor, or from a prestige university. Happy to play school poker with you. I have a pair of aces.
NAMES OF 95 UNCOUNTED KING COUNTY ABSENTEE BALLOTS
Here is the list courtesy of King 5 News:
Aarness, Judy K. Covington
Anderson, Harry E. Kent
Andrus, Martin R. Renton
Arnesen, Spencer Bellevue
Bacerdo, Sandra L. Bellevue
Bachmeier, Magdalena Renton
Beck, Karen Sue Mercer Island
Billingsley, Patricia A. Issaquah
Blount, John H. Tukwila
Brown, Elisabeth Mercer Island
Butts, Joseph W. Bellevue
Bye, Susan M. Renton
Calhoun, Mary J. Renton
Carter, Paul J. Mercer Island
Casebolt, Jamie Leeann Renton
Chharing, Diki D. Kent
Chharing, Kathy Kent
Church, Julie Ann Seattle
Clarberg, Barbara May Auburn
Crites, Gina L. Renton
Crites, Jeffrey D. Renton
Crow, Rod Seattle
Daltin, Vicky Kent
Darrah, James E. Renton
Ferry, Maude M. Mercer Island
Fitts, Monica Ann Maple Valley
Franke, Fred J. Renton
Franks, Jeffrey Kent
Gambino, Julie Seattle
Gray, Jewel P. Renton
Grissom, Aaron J. Kent
Grube, Doris A. Renton
Guenther, Ann E. Renton
Hammerly, Michelle A. Newcastle
Hampton III, Edward Lee Covington
Hander, Michael D. Auburn
Harris, Gaye M. Kirkland
Heilman, Sarah C. Newcastle
Hicks, Jon M. Renton
Hill, Jennifer E. Woodinville
Iyer, Shushanta R. Bellevue
Jackson, William D. Kent
Jennings, Leo Renton
Jensen, Amdra L. Kent
Jones, Gisela M. Issaquah
Jones, Janet M. Bellevue
Kamla, Diane Elaine Newcastle
Leonard, Shirley L. Auburn
Leveque, Lindsay A. Bellevue
Liliequist, Kami R Bellevue
Masten, Adelle S. Covington
Matthew, Cathy L. Renton
Merz, Eleanor B. Kent
Moore, Janet Newcastle
Musselman, Lloyd R. Federal Way
Nahm, Clifford W. Issaquah
Nelson, Edna A. Renton
Nelson, Ruth A. Seattle
Newhouse, Alan K. Newcastle
Pelascini, Cecilia Bellevue
Peritore, Ann B. Normandy Park
Pham, Nga K. Tukwila
Phelps, Marcia L. Kent
Phillips, Deanthony Bellevue
Phillips, Edna W. Renton
Rajpaul, Vinod K. Bellevue
Rankin, Toni A. Kent
Rice, Carolyn M. Renton
Rittenhouse, Chrissy Kent
Ross, Jonathan K. Woodinville
Russell, Beverly A. Auburn
Sanner, Scott Renton
Simpson, Teri L. Auburn
Stansbury, Kenneth L. Bellevue
Stansbury, Todd M. Bellevue
Stansbury, Wendy E. Bellevue
Staub, Frances V. Bellevue
Steere, Toby R. Bellevue
Stevenson, Jerri Louise Renton
Stewart, Paul M. Covington
Stewart, Shirley M. Covington
Stocks, John S. Auburn
Tiberio, Colleen F. Woodinville
Toole, Ann Newton Bellevue
Tossini, Adriana E. Mercer Island
Toyohara, Mitsi Bellevue
Tran, Toan N. Bellevue
Turner, Alan Dale Renton
Van Auken, Garland Auburn
Van Horn, Betty L. Kent
Vazquez, Jose Martin Kent
Vercheak, Michael J. Renton
Webb, Jason Daniel none
Unidentified one
Unidentified two
The next step is to find out who they voted for. But even if all 95 voted for Rossi, it would not change the election outcome.
”The University of Washington paid a $35 million fine for overcharging.”
Good! It sounds like there was Medicare fraud going on to warrant such a fine. Why would I have a problem with the UW being fined over it?
”Sure the University provides some benefits…I’m just questioning why all these wonderful research project and investment isn’t lowering the cost of education for our kids. Isn’t that a fair question??? “
Was something in post 51 unclear? The research funding does lower the cost for students, and it has for decades (or longer).
The State has cut its per-student contribution to the UW operating expenses, so either the UW must cut students (in which case the research subsidy increases per student slightly) or the UW must raise tuition. It is not very complex, really.
King 5 also reports a $450 million increase in the state revenue forecast, which Republicans are using to decry the 2005 Legislature’s $480 million increase in “sin” taxes as unnecessary. However, Democrats say the additional money will be needed for rising school enrollments and caseloads, and pension funding shortfalls (i.e., the state’s employer contribution to the pension funds for current employees).
64
“The research funding does lower the cost for students, and it has for decades (or longer).”
This has been general knowledge for many years. It also creates employment (the U.W. is Seattle’s largest employer) and brings businesses into our state. The U.W.’s research grant income is a net bonus for Washington.
It will be interesting to compare the King 5 list (obtained from King County through a public records request) with Stefan’s list to see how many he got wrong.
I’ll bet if Stefan wrongly informed someone their vote wasn’t counted you’ll never hear about it on Sound Politics. I’ll bet that weasel (no relation to cute fluffy rabbits like me) doesn’t have the guts to admit his mistakes.
67; or to the KCRE list that they never gave us
funny aint it, good at counting Seattle folks, not so good at these suburbanites or their military kin
Roger Rabbit Don @ 49
The smart rich kids can get merit-based scholarships at good private schools that make the private school bill competitive or less than the bill at UW. So go ahead and raise the UW tuition and fewer of them will go there. That will be the “unintended consequence”.
69, What list are you referring to?
Marilyn; waivers. Why not give equal rights to rich and to poor; no classism please.
zip @ 71
Is that right? Are there enough of those to go around? But let’s take a closer look at your use of the term “merit,” because that’s quite a red herring you’ve flung out there.
Yes, if you are an Einstein with a perfect GPA, you can get a free ticket to the Ivy League school of your choice.
But what about the thousands of kids in our state who did a decent job in high school, but aren’t Einsteins, don’t want to be nuclear physicists, and can’t afford private college, but want a chance to become teachers, nurses, engineers, or accountants so they can earn a middle class living?
There aren’t enough seats, let alone enough scholarships, in private colleges to accomodate all of the students who deserve a college education, or to produce all of the college graduates our economy needs. Not by a long shot.
Are you suggesting that if a kid isn’t smart enough to get a scholarship to a private college, he isn’t deserving or lacks merit? By this definition, over 90% of college graduates lack “merit.”
How about you? Which private college did you get a full scholarship to? Or are you just a dummy like the rest of us?
By the way, zip, very few students get full-ticket scholarships to private schools. Virtually all private schools negotiate a package with the student that includes a mix of one or more of tuition reduction, financial aid, student loans, parental contribution, and work study. The only kids who get full scholarships are athletes and a very small number of very highly recruited scholars with very outstanding records and very great academic potential.
Nothing on (u)SP yet about the list.
I greatly appreciate folks such as dj, bj-too, and David for injecting actual facts and nuanced thought into an otherwise deeply depressing conversation. Indeed, this thread powerfully illustrates why good colleges are more important to our state than job creation.
A well-functioning democracy requires thoughtful and civil discourse. Our society will not be able to resolve the great political issues of our time unless a critical mass of the electorate has learned how to talk across differences. (This includes the increasingly rare ability to really hear someone, admit when you are mistaken, and acknowledge when debate opponents have made good points.) Our society can’t keep pace with increasingly complex challenges when people can’t rise beyond white-black, good-evil positions, or don’t know how to string together a logical argument based upon credible facts. A good college education teaches these citizenship skills.
This thread was launched by Goldy’s support for a more market-based approach to tuition setting. Personally, I’d rather see the state increase its support for UW than push it farther toward a private funding model. Given the tone of this conversation, my hopes may be futile. If the Democrats are being “elitist” in their proposal, it reflects a certain amount of political desperation. What’s a realistic alternative?
ABD–
“Civil discourse” is the LEFTIST PINHEAD mantra for shut-up and agree with me…or I’ll psycho-babble you in conversation until you go stark raving mad…and then agree with me or no longer care.
Fuck you ADB…and the horse you road in on!
You’ve made your point very clearly and passionately, Mr. Cynical. I do, however, have a few follow-up questions:
Were you the kind of kid who threw a tantrum every time you lost a board game? At work do secretaries cower when you open your office door? Is your wife exceptionally meek, or did she finally leave after you unleashed one too many tirades?
Or is your raging bully persona just an act you do for money, a blogospheric call girl of the keyboards?
You haven’t been around here very long, have you ABD.
Mrs. Cynical is 370 lbs of determined woman.
She takes shit from no one, especially me.
I never lost at board games.
However, LEFTIST PINHEADS do walk 3-4 blocks out of their way to avoid crossing paths with me on the street….which I consider a badge of honor.
No one has ever paid me a nickel to Blog.
I do it cuz I’m tired of being pushed around by assholes like you.
abd; you guys aren’t asking for market based; you’re asking for subsidized for all, but more subsidized for the less affluent. Duh.
Don
I said “The smart rich kids can get merit-based scholarships at good private schools that make the private school bill competitive or less than the bill at UW.” This is a true statement. Your responses mis stated my claim so deserve no response.
re @42: What the hell I’m talking about is that costs at state universities are rising much faster than the costs of EVERYTHING else in this country and tons of money is being pumped into the state university systems. Are you so intent on showing everyone how smart you are with numbers that you’ve lost your common sense? There has to be reasons why a dollar does not go as far at a state university as it does everywhere else. That’s WHY people want audits. That is the problem.
lucy–
You’ve got it nailed.
dj is so into numbers provided by the University and so void of common sense that he cannot simply stand back, take a whiff and sense that something ain’t right here.
IT’S A SHELL GAME!
We need to have very clear Programatic Budgeting and Financial Statements that tie into the overall University Budget and Financial Statements. Otherwise, you will never find the fucking pea!!
dj is a very good statistician.
But good statisticians are not necessarily good Financial Analysts…and they certainly are not CFO’s.
You are so lost in the stats, you forgot to do your subjective “smell test” here dj. For shame!
ABD — Just go with the flow, Mr. Cynical Idiot is always good for some laughs. For example:
“However, LEFTIST PINHEADS do walk 3-4 blocks out of their way to avoid crossing paths with me on the street….which I consider a badge of honor.”
Funniest thing I’ve read today!!! (If you knew Mr. C, you’d know exactly what I mean.)
Hey Cynical you skulking chickenshit with a yellow stripe down your back, when if ever are you going to grace us with your presence at the Montlake Ale House? We won’t grope you. We promise.
83
Then why did you respond? BTW my name is Roger not Don. Learn to read, you illiterate fuck.
Lucy, as I explained before, the state subsidy for instructional costs has declined, so tuition had to go up.
RogerRabbit–your 89th identity. In KingCo, you could have easily voted 89 times. NO CONTROLS!! Honor systems. KOOOL!!
An honor system for LEFTIST PINHEADS?? Now there is a recipe for scoundrelism!!
Roger Rabbit @86–
I won’t go to the Mountlake Ale House because of cross-dressers like you in your bunny costume dropping little pellets all over the place. It’s also a well-known Gay Bar idiot.
Gulp Gulp, well ain’t that right, she has 3.5 years left to totally screw the taxpayers and now the college kids in this state. Let’s set them up for higher college loans to pay back once they get out of school.
Well here is one individual who she is not going to have the chance to screw with her 7% per year college tuition raises, and her 50% proposed privatizing of UW. Not one additional red cent! My kids educations are already purchased, not even Miss Gregoire can screw with that GET contract.
The GET (Guaranteed Education Program in Washington State) program, is a prepaid college program where you pay for a year of college for your kids and no matter how much the current governor decides to raise tuition in these institutions, you get the years at UW or any other state college for the price you paid for it when you bought it. Right now and up to the end of August, you can pre purchase a year of college (100 credits at $66 per credit) at the UW for $6600. WSU and I suspect Western (but don’t know for sure), also take 100 credits per years tuition. Others like Central and Eastern I believe take 70 credits for a full years tuition. Junior colleges take even less, around 50 credits for a year. That may seem like alot, but with the tax and spending Miss B in office, and a 50% increase likely in these Universities, it will be a right now savings of $4400 per year.
http://www.get.wa.gov/
Save yourself and your pocketbook from being picked any more!
Borrow the money if you have to, it will be far cheaper than the 50% increase she will go along with. And you can bet she will pass these increases along to every college in this state if given half a chance in her last 3.5 yrs.
Check it out:
http://www.get.wa.gov/
$6600 per year vs her proposed $10,000 per year. You do the math!
63
I do believe (if I’m not mistaken) that YOU SAID “all the action is centered on Univ Ave.” and I SAID “the system’s most important component … is the community college system. The Ave. may be the center of the state’s public higher ed universe but it is not the whole universe” — sooooo … how is my response not germane to (a) the U.W. topic and (b) what you said? Seems pretty damned responsive to me.
I’ll bet Stefan got the list here first. Next time you want to know something, Steffie Baby, check HorsesAss for the straight poop! snark snark [raucous animal laughter noises in background]
70
they didn’t give it to you because it didn’t exist when you requested it, jackass!
72
Well that will solve the capacity problem won’t it? More kids with 3.5 GPAs and community college transfers will be able to get it without spending $$$ on more buildings and staff. A win-win for everybody!
Cynical Idiot @ 89
I am, in fact, a most honorable rabbit and — trust me — I voted only once. My 6,342 offspring each voted only once, too. BTW we’re all Democrats.
Cynical Idiot @ 90
Chickenshit, just as I thought.
Yeah I understand now what you meant when you said liberals don’t get within 3-4 blocks of you. You’re running away too fast.
Hey, Cynical (the way you comport yourself, you don’t deserve to be called “Mr.”):
@ 90: “I won’t go to the Mountlake Ale House . . . a well-known Gay Bar”
The Montlake Ale House (not “Mountlake”) is a pub that’s especially family-friendly; it’s not a gay bar. But you don’t need to consult your conscience as you label a nice wholesome place as something you find abhorrent. Do the words “false witness” mean nothing to you, you sniveling homophobe?
The Montlake Ale House is a “casual, family-friendly pub and restaurant,” says Penelope Corcoran’s restaurant review, noting its unique “carpeted sunken play area for kids.”
False and mean: no one should trust anything you write here.
Ooh, I’ve got a new hypothesis: Cynical is actually Gollum.
David @ 99 & 100
I agree the Mountlake Ale House is a fine wholesome family-oriented restaurant….. UNTIL fudgepackers like you, Don and the other wear it on my sleeve homo’s show up. I don’t consider you cross-dressing to be very family-oriented,,,,it scares the kids when they see you dressed like a woman standing at the urinal!!
Headless Lucy @ 84
”What the hell I’m talking about is that costs at state universities are rising much faster than the costs of EVERYTHING else in this country and tons of money is being pumped into the state university systems. Are you so intent on showing everyone how smart you are with numbers that you’ve lost your common sense? There has to be reasons why a dollar does not go as far at a state university as it does everywhere else. That’s WHY people want audits. That is the problem.”
Ok, I will try one more time.
(1) The cost of “everything” is not going up at the UW (some numbers below).
(2) The State is NOT pumping more money into the UW—the State has gradually reduced its operating revenue to the State (numbers below).
First, lets look at inflation. According to an inflation calculator (www.westegg.com/inflation ), something for $1.00 in the year 2000 cost $1.08 in 2004.
The two major public sources of instructional revenue at the UW come from Tuition and State operation revenue. In 2000, the UW took in the following “instructional revenue”:
2000 (actual revenues)
Tuition: $250M
State:__ $344M
_______________
Total:___ $594M
Suppose the number of students remained constant from 2000 to 2004 (really, they increased) and the only source of instructional revenue was (1) state revenue increasing to match inflation and (2) tuition hikes to match inflation. The, using the above inflation calculator, we would expect the following revenues in 2004:
2004 (inflation only)
Tuition: $270M
State:__ $372M
___________
Total:___ $642M
Now, lets look at the actual revenues in 2004
2004 (actual revenues)
Tuition: $304M
State:__ $310M
___________
Total:___ $614M
So, first, notice that totals (tuition plus State operating) did not even come close to keeping up with inflation. This is entirely because the State operating monies did not keep up with inflation. In fact, they shrunk from $344M to $310M, when inflation would require $372 just to keep even. Tuition had to increase between 2000 to 2004 just to partially offset the loss of State Revenue (plus inflation).
There is no voodoo or shell game. It is very straight-forward (although we will see whether Mr. Cynical, through his Libertarian-tainted eyes can keep up with the math). The numbers come from major categories in published public financial statements.
I hope it is crystal clear to you now that expenses are not going up faster at the UW than the rate of inflation.
The State Legislature wants higher enrollment. What do you recommend the UW do to cover the costs of the additional students?
She must have missed the part when the then president of Boeing told the Seattle Rotary Club that due to red tape and the unfreindly tax structure Boeing will never build another major facility in the state of Washington again.
dj–
The “published financial statements” are published by whom???
ANSWER: They are the financial statements of the University.
When the State Auditor does his exam it is very surfacey….making sure numbers are in the right boxes and that they add up.
The UW Medical Center had “published financial statements” too dj. And they included millions and millions of “OVERBILLINGS” that were ultimately repaid along with penalties.
Where there is smoke there is generally fire dj. I’m questioning these “published financial statements” because prior “published financial statements” were erroneous because of these massive overbillings.
Go ahead and believe what you are being spoon-fed. I thought you were more curious than that dj.
The wasted money is not a scheme or plot. It is an institutionalized way of doing things.To get a grip on the simplest part of it, You need a list of people who purchase commonplace items for the UW ( Toilet paper was used as an example before) what they buy, and how much they pay for it. Then this needs to be compared with what these items could actually be purchased for at a more reasonable price. A prosaic, simple “accountability” procedure such as this would save the UW alot of money. As simple as it may seem to those who want complicated reasons, as far as many purchases go : “While the cat’s away, the mice will play.”
I dont know about the UW but most sound area public schools purchase through a so called nonprofit organisation called King County Directors Association, this outfit needs investigation. I know for a fact that 12 years ago they were charging the Bethel School District $95.00 for a rubber Spalding basketball, $85.00 for a red playground ball, I could go on all day but next time you are in the most expensive store you can find, check the price of the most expensive basketball, you will see my point.
Mr. Cynical @ 104
You idiot! The UW is audited the same way as every state agency. My understanding of the Medicaid fraud is that some doctors were charging for procedures they were not doing. There were no issues with the UW financial statements.
Detail, Cynical, details! With out ’em, you end up spewing bullshit like all that crap you said during the election contest!
headless lucy @ 105
“You need a list of people who purchase commonplace items for the UW ( Toilet paper was used as an example before) what they buy, and how much they pay for it. Then this needs to be compared with what these items could actually be purchased for at a more reasonable price.”
I see. And how does your “suggested procedures” differ from how it is actually done?
You don’t really know what you are talking about, do you?
If anyone reads any posts from that dispicable, lying, piece of shit Pudster “Wounded Knee” tell him I’ve responded to his post on the Shiavo Autopsy thread @ 269.
Thanks,
GBS
Chuck @ 106 and HL @ 105
The UW does not use King County Directors Association.
For standard items (like toilet paper) the UW/State contract price can be found in their catalog. The catalog is available for all to enjoy on the web. They pay $0.52 per roll for a standard roll of TP.
dj@107–
I admire your statistical ability.
I am concerned about your lack of common sense.
And you are complete fucking idiot when it comes to financial statements and disclosures.
In you fanatacism to defend the UW, you miss 2 important points:
1) That even though the UW was “audited” like every other State Agency, that doesn’t mean the SCOPE of the Audit was such that the auditors would ferret out much of anything. They are mediocre compliance type audits UNLESS someone raises a major non-compliance issue. I can assure you that after years of undergoing these audits, those bureaucrats in power know precisely what will be looked at and how to mask any problems. Kind of like Professional Athletes masking illegal drugs in urine tests.
2) The UW Medical Dept. had financial responsibility for overbillings and the related fines. My point is, the UW Financial Statements reflected excess revenue because they counted these overbillings. The overbillings were caught in a Medicare Audit…therefore in hindsight the UW Financial Statements in years they overbilled overstated revenue by millions. Future years had to absorb the fines.
The UW State Agency Audit did not catch these problems you fucking idiot. This is the problem. THESE STATE AGENCY AUDITS ARE NOT OF ADEQUATE SCOPE!!!!!
Stick with stats dj. You do a fine job there. Part of our State’s problem is most bureaucrats, elected officials and fucking idiots like you hear the word AUDIT and feel that means those numbers are rock solid!! Look at Enron and Worldcom dj you fucking moron….they had audits with scopes way beyond the scope of these State Agency audits and what happened.
Now is the time for a full-blown compliance AND performance audit overseen by an independent group of outside professionals.
The Financial Statements, even when audited, are still the financial statements of the State Agency. There are clear disclaimers in the opinions about the scope NOT being such as to necessarily discover FRAUD and other IRREGULARITIES.
Fuck you dj…you are a fucking apologist when you should use your skills to be a questioner. Lucy gets it and we haven’t agreed on much. The UW doesn’t need an apologist. They need a microscope.
dj@ 108:I used to do quite a bit of contract work for the fed. gov’t., dj, so I think that I have a pretty good handle on how large bureaucracies work and how things get bidded out and paid for and the job level of the person who does the paying. I respect your ability to use numbers to explain things, but you’re just going to have to accept the fact that there are a few other people that know a thing or two as well.
dj@ 110: .52 cents a roll for the quantity of TP they buy and use seems like an absurdly high price to pay— unless it’s extra soft triple-ply Northern. You can buy the cheap stuff in a supermarket for less than that.As you have often reminded HA readers: “The devil is in the details.”
Somebody is making a shitload of money off these rolls of TP!
headless lucy @ 112
Good point. I won’t argue with you about contract work with the fed government. But, unless you either (1) get some experience with the UW process or (2) simply go to the UW purchasing web site and learn a little before spewing bullshit, I’ll kindky ask you to shove your opinion up your ass.
You claimed that “inflation is higher at the UW” than elsewhere. I’ve demonstrated that your assertion is baseless. I am not particularly thrilled with the past tuition hikes at the UW, but the State has decided to fund higher education by charging users more of their costs and reducing the tax payer’s subsidy.
dj—
Spewing the bureaucratic line. What a loser!!!
You are so infatuated with statistics but in this case refuse to even consider that there might be something wrong with the source data. You get stars in your eyes because the UW is AUDITED. BFD!! You don’t get it…dj is Mr. See-No-Evil when it comes to his beloved UW. How nice.
I’m sure that not knowing anyone at UW would put me in a position where I’d have to play by all the official rules. But, if I worked there a year in some capacity I guarantee you that I could find a way around all those obstacles and be selling the UW its TP. Its people skills and who you know AND knowing when you’re going in who it is you want to know.
I’m not just spinnin’ yarns here for you. I raised a family and bought cars, houses and all that good stuff just by being able to use my wits and capitalize on my connections. Since you like numbers and don’t mind spending a little time finding the ones you need,try this little experiment. Find out how much toilet paper is used on the campus yearly and make a few phone calls to see how much you could save on toilet paper alone by saving even a nickel a roll on it. It’s easier than you think. .52 cents a roll seems awfully steep!
@113
I don’t think anybody is pocketing TP skimmings. What’s happening is when you buy TP at Safeway the purchasing decision goes through only 1 layer of management. When you’re the U.W. buying boxcar loads of the stuff, there’s a lot more administrative overhead. I doubt Safeway could supply the quantities needed by the U.W. at retail cost. Lots of logistics there.
Mr. Cynical @ 111
I am afriad you are losing your marbles. I’ve not offered an opinion on audits to you or anybody on this thread. I was discussing tuition increases, inflation, annual reports, etc. The one time I used the word in this thread was a factual statement.
I don’t give a rats ass whether or not you accept the financial statements. The most important numbers I was using are utterly transparent: that is, the amount of state funding to the UW. The numbers come out of the state budget, you idiot!
Do you somehow doubt that the state has substantially reduced its subsidy to the UW for teaching? If not, then we agree on something. But, making stupid-ass statements about why research doesn’t help subsidize the teaching mission, or blowing smoke about the Medicare fraud in the med school doesn’t address the issue at hand.
On the UW:
One aspect of funding for universities that has always been abused is the “study grant” where a particular agenda is set for determining why something happens. In most cases, the study could have been avoided by taking a survey or applying simple logic. Thus, most studies can be lumped into the absurdly obvious category…
Case in point: Sexual activities of ugly people (oops, it was actually Nocturnal Procreation as practiced by the Aesthetically Challenged)…
Quite simply, why does one need such a study? Let’s look to the conclusions for answers…
1. Ugly people tend to have low self-esteem.
2. They are not likely to be aggressive in pursuit of mating, but tend toward rudeness when interacting with others.
3. More study is required to obtain a complete data set.
Number 3 is always included in any study; so don’t be surprised that it is included.
Naturally, I disagree with the findings in #1 and 2. Simple logic dictates that ugly people don’t have sex because they are unattractive.
Curiously, the study found an increase in the sexual activities of ugly people based on two intertwined occurrences: Tuesday nights plus Montlake Ale House. The study procurator says more study is needed on-site. :)
I’m talking factory direct. Just look at the information on the package of the Kirkland brand TP at COSTCO. It’s going to be just some factory somewhere that makes the product and will package it for you. They could order official UW toiletpaper(nicely packaged and labeled) and get it for less than .52 cents a roll. I never suggested going to Safeway and buying up all their toilet paper. Another cost-saving thing would be to look at all those expensive and useless layers of administration that Roger Rabbit mentioned. Those sinecures for the well-connected have just got to go. dj, are you really sure that you are in favor of this kind of citizen involvement? Might rock the boat a little, huh?
marks@119
Good un dude!!!
Someone needs to be totally void of morals and have an iron-gut to study these LEFTIST PINHEADS.
dj–
You were justifying the tuition increase using past years as a baseline. Did it ever occur to you that past years may also have righties and lefties with there arms in the cookie jar???
Keep justifying your beloved UW you idiot. You are mighty naive dude.
Mr. Cynical @ 121
Oh brother. . . what an idiot you are!
dj–
Besides being naive and an idiot, you are also a nincompoop!
Statsman yes. Common sense zero.
You probably recommended Worldcom and Enron to your PINHEADED pals because “the audited numbers” looked good.
You can’t see the forest dude cuz of all them damn trees.
Go back to playing around with spreadsheets in the world of make-believe. You are way out of your league when it comes to critical financial analysis.
You probably believe yer little weinie is 10 inches long cuz it says so in some audited UW study even though you need to use a tweezers to take a piss!!! No fucking common sense.
Cynical @ 123
You simply have no idea what I think about audits, corruption, waste, and the effects of being part of a state government on the University. I have simply never discussed these issues with you. If I did discuss them with you, I believe you would find that we agree on some points, disagree on others.
The difference between us, however, is that I’ve worked in numerous administrative and academic positions in several UW-sized state universities. I’ve seen the good and the bad (and no single university has all the good).
You on the other hand, have a 200 HP concrete pump sucking bullshit out of your ass and plastering it on this blog. You have not a clue what you are talking about. Your only argument is: “Did it ever occur to you that past years may also have righties and lefties with there arms in the cookie jar???”
Oh, puuulllease! Your argument is, essentially, “The UW is a big government organization therefore they simply MUST be corrupt.” We could pull that bullshit with any organization. Hmmmm. . . let’s see:
— the BIAW is one of the bigger Home Builder associations in the country, therefore it MUST be corrupt.
— (u)Sound Politics is one of the largest conservative regional blogs, therefore it MUST really be a clandestine tool of the GOP.
Those kinds of arguments are simply not productive. Instead, they are boilerplate bullshit claims spewed by those who lack any real argument.
What our “discussion” really boils down to is that you have no substantive argument whatsoever to counter the statements I made that the loss of state funding is the primary reason for tuition increases at the UW in recent years.
(You even fail on your own bullshit argument, because “arms in the cookie jar” would not change the rate of tuition increase, you dope!)
1. I work damn hard for my money, am not rich enough to pay for the legal staff necessary to avoid many of the taxes in Washington, so I probably pay more taxes than either the poor or the rich, Because I work hard, I am in the middle class….since I have a son at UW, who is an outstandingly bright and performing student (>1550 SAT and excellent grades). It’s really amazing that when he graduated from High School, he could not get a scholarship because use his middle classness and whiteness, not even a merit scholarship. There were tons of scholarships for people based solely on their skin pigment. Now because of this middle class label, I would not qualify for Gregoire’s targetted tuition reduction. This is nothing more than another screw the white guy program…..you know that I will be paying more for my son than anyone else, I will have to pay full tuition, even though I pay the most taxes……welcome to the DEMOCRATIC state of Washington….your Republican Vote does not count here. Well, Christine, you can probably see you aren’t my governor.