Idiocracy: University of Michigan (known for research) regents ban research at UofM

Idiocracy: University of Michigan (known for research) regents ban research at UofM

This story seems so absurd I had to read it twice to make sure I read what I actually thought I'd read. It's true. The University ofMichigan is one of the top research schools on the planet. Graduate assistants are the lifeblood of the research program. They work hard, are intellectually curious, and end up getting a PhD for their troubles. Until now, because the regents of UofM have decided that they should throw a wrench into the research gears just to see what would happen. From The Detroit News: Give Brotherhood a (Go Blue) cheer

More evidence that elected officials too often don't act in the interest of fiscal responsibility or the people who elect them comes from the University of Michigan, where the Democratic-dominated Board of Regents voted to let graduate researchers pursue forming a union.

These are students, as University of Michigan President Mary Sue Coleman pointed out in opposing the move. They have not traditionally been considered employees; in fact, no other university in the nation has unionized student researchers.

They do receive compensation for their work on grant-funded research projects, and U-M gives them health care and free tuition. But the work they are doing is part of their studies.

Coleman worries that placing the researchers into a union would "fundamentally alter the relationship between faculty and graduate students."

Funny she had no such worries about ObamaCare fundamentally changing the patient-doctor relationship, and that between citizens and the government, but anyway. But here's the thing. It's troubling enough that this will lead to higher tuition, higher wages and more bennies to grad students. It's the hours and working conditions that will make research all but dead. As a former grad student myself, i can tell you that I essentially lived at the University. I spent at minimum of 100 hours a week on work. Not because someone told me so, but because I wanted to. It was intellectually stimulating and fun for me. I was climbing my ownmountain to put up my own flag on the summit. All my grad student colleagues did pretty much the same thing. We lived and breathed our research. If some union honcho was walking the hallways tallying our hours, we would be sent home by Wednesday for the week. It simply won't do. That research was part of my studies, and whatever time I dedicated to it was of my own choosing. A union would have destroyed that.

This is #58,882 why Democrats should not be elected to any office whatsoever. They were hired to look out for the best interestof UofM in this case. Instead they are just puppets of Big Labor and look out for unions, not UofM. Writes the News:

...The Democratic regents were elected with labor money, and that they would serve labor's interests can be expected.
The Democratic argument that the researchers are employees is particularly flimsy, given that the MichiganEmployment Relations Commission previously ruled their work as researchers is indistinguishable from their role as students, and therefore they shouldn't be considered employees.

Cornell decision to ax courses steps on academic freedom

We are Cornell professors devoted to our university and to the pursuit of knowledge. Pushing the boundaries of knowledge, although often exhilarating, can be challenging.

We now find ourselves at odds between our scholarly responsibilities and our institution's expectations. One of us has formulated a fascinating and intellectually elegant way of understanding nutrition. The other has become aware of an oversight in Albert Einstein's special theory of relativity. Both of our interpretations profoundly challenge current paradigms, with far-reaching implications. Critique and challenge is something we welcome.

We recently met each other because both of our courses were removed from the Cornell course catalog without consulting us — effectively removing our perspectives from the curriculum and from further consideration by Cornell students. We now question the way that Cornell handles the teaching of scientific matters that do not conform to the status quo.

These assaults on academic freedom have not gone unnoticed outside of Cornell, and have been reported on in the June newsletter of the American Institute for Science and Technology Education and in the documentary film "Forks over Knives."

Alarmingly, the elimination of our courses was performed without consulting us as instructors and with no explanation (except for one letter now being suppressed). We appealed the decisions only to find that the process was tightly controlled with no transparency. To this day, no reasons for the course cancelations have been given.

In one case, the decision to eliminate the course was crafted by an administrator having a personal association with an industry and companion government agency known to be unhappy with one of our professional views, as offered in the course.

In the second case, the possibility exists that the course was removed under the auspices of a dean who happens to be a geneticist because the students were taught to develop an active skepticism about the lucrative trends in genetics, such as modifying food crops using antibiotic-resistance genes and performing genetic tests for mental illness and athletic performance. Cornell University should be a "marketplace of ideas" as Justice William Brennan described the role of the American university, and not the ideas of the marketplace as it currently seems to be.

We wish to speak of the serious assault on academic freedom that these administrative actions represent. In both cases, single administrators acted in an arbitrary and capricious manner with no input from the instructor. Indeed, we question Cornell's commitment to the concept of academic freedom, a serious matter that questions fundamental issues of university credibility and integrity.

We hold dear the concept of academic freedom and believe that challenging dogma is not only a right but a responsibility when we have observations and findings to support our views. Without intellectual freedom of inquiry and expression of opinion, the core mission of a university is eviscerated and the academy ceases to exist. Without having such academies, a society decays into autocracy. In such a scenario, we can no longer claim to have universities of, by and for free thinkers.

We are both sincere about our career findings. So are a growing community of people and institutions outside of Cornell. But our researches seem to be presenting serious challenge to Cornell. While we do not know the reasons why our courses were eliminated covertly, it has not escaped our notice that the administrators who made the decisions were, intentionally or not, serving the interests of their industry counterparts.

We both are proud to be Cornellian. One of us came to the Cornell faculty 23 years ago. The other did his graduate work at Cornell, returned to Cornell as a full professor 37 years ago and was then appointed to an endowed chair. He developed a highly productive research program that was generously funded by the U.S. taxpayer via the National Institutes of Health. It is our purpose to think, to explore new vistas and to share them with students and others in a manner that is consistent with human welfare and progress. We believe that most people support this view and we can only hope that Cornell will see the error of its ways.

The concept of academic freedom is essential to the mission of any university. Students and faculty must have the right to explore issues, including those that may be inconvenient to external political groups or to authorities, without being subjected to discriminatory practices and repercussions. We are a public institution and are obligated to share our views with students and with the public according to what our scholarship may reveal. It is not our purpose, as instructors and researchers, to speak for the academy as an institution. It is our purpose to share what we believe are ideas that can create a new public narrative benefiting Cornell, ourselves and our society.

Campbell is professor emeritus of nutritional biochemistry and Wayne is associate professor of plant biology. Both work at Cornell University.

Professors Claim University Curriculum Is Being Bought and Paid For By Special Interests

We are Cornell professors devoted to our university and to the pursuit of knowledge. Pushing the boundaries of knowledge, although often exhilarating, can be challenging.

We now find ourselves at odds between our scholarly responsibilities and our institution's expectations. One of us has formulated a fascinating and intellectually elegant way of understanding nutrition. The other has become aware of an oversight in Albert Einstein's special theory of relativity. Both of our interpretations profoundly challenge current paradigms, with far-reaching implications. Critique and challenge is something we welcome.

We recently met each other because both of our courses were removed from the Cornell course catalog without consulting us — effectively removing our perspectives from the curriculum and from further consideration by Cornell students. We now question the way that Cornell handles the teaching of scientific matters that do not conform to the status quo.

These assaults on academic freedom have not gone unnoticed outside of Cornell, and have been reported on in the June newsletter of the American Institute for Science and Technology Education and in the documentary film "Forks over Knives."

Alarmingly, the elimination of our courses was performed without consulting us as instructors and with no explanation (except for one letter now being suppressed). We appealed the decisions only to find that the process was tightly controlled with no transparency. To this day, no reasons for the course cancelations have been given.

In one case, the decision to eliminate the course was crafted by an administrator having a personal association with an industry and companion government agency known to be unhappy with one of our professional views, as offered in the course.

In the second case, the possibility exists that the course was removed under the auspices of a dean who happens to be a geneticist because the students were taught to develop an active skepticism about the lucrative trends in genetics, such as modifying food crops using antibiotic-resistance genes and performing genetic tests for mental illness and athletic performance. Cornell University should be a "marketplace of ideas" as Justice William Brennan described the role of the American university, and not the ideas of the marketplace as it currently seems to be.

We wish to speak of the serious assault on academic freedom that these administrative actions represent. In both cases, single administrators acted in an arbitrary and capricious manner with no input from the instructor. Indeed, we question Cornell's commitment to the concept of academic freedom, a serious matter that questions fundamental issues of university credibility and integrity.

We hold dear the concept of academic freedom and believe that challenging dogma is not only a right but a responsibility when we have observations and findings to support our views. Without intellectual freedom of inquiry and expression of opinion, the core mission of a university is eviscerated and the academy ceases to exist. Without having such academies, a society decays into autocracy. In such a scenario, we can no longer claim to have universities of, by and for free thinkers.

We are both sincere about our career findings. So are a growing community of people and institutions outside of Cornell. But our researches seem to be presenting serious challenge to Cornell. While we do not know the reasons why our courses were eliminated covertly, it has not escaped our notice that the administrators who made the decisions were, intentionally or not, serving the interests of their industry counterparts.

We both are proud to be Cornellian. One of us came to the Cornell faculty 23 years ago. The other did his graduate work at Cornell, returned to Cornell as a full professor 37 years ago and was then appointed to an endowed chair. He developed a highly productive research program that was generously funded by the U.S. taxpayer via the National Institutes of Health. It is our purpose to think, to explore new vistas and to share them with students and others in a manner that is consistent with human welfare and progress. We believe that most people support this view and we can only hope that Cornell will see the error of its ways.

The concept of academic freedom is essential to the mission of any university. Students and faculty must have the right to explore issues, including those that may be inconvenient to external political groups or to authorities, without being subjected to discriminatory practices and repercussions. We are a public institution and are obligated to share our views with students and with the public according to what our scholarship may reveal. It is not our purpose, as instructors and researchers, to speak for the academy as an institution. It is our purpose to share what we believe are ideas that can create a new public narrative benefiting Cornell, ourselves and our society.

Campbell is professor emeritus of nutritional biochemistry and Wayne is associate professor of plant biology. Both work at Cornell University.

Conyers Calls 6th Circuit Decision Overturning Proposition 2 a Key Step Toward Restoring Equity in Michigan Higher Education

Conyers Calls 6th Circuit Decision Overturning Proposition 2 a Key Step Toward Restoring Equity in Michigan Higher Education (Washington) – House Judiciary Committee Ranking Member John Conyers, Jr. (D-Mich.) called today’s Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals decision to overturn Michigan’s ban on affirmative action a victory for equal opportunity in higher education.  The court ruled Proposition 2 violated the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment.   The 2006 law required Michigan’s public university system to abandon its affirmative action programs despite a series of Supreme Court decisions in 2003 that had upheld the policy’s constitutionality.  “As an opponent of Proposition 2, I am heartened by today’s decision from the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals,” said Conyers.  “After losing in court, forces from outside our state attempted to gain a victory through the referendum process, like they did in several other states.  This ruling stops their momentum and gives us the opportunity to restore an admissions process, approved by the same courts, that will give all students an equal opportunity to attend our state universities, while still recognizing the unique hurdles overcome by those from racial or ethnic minority groups.” “This victory should be considered a key step toward restoring equity in Michigan higher education.”

NY Nepotism Creeps Into the State SUNY Universities

With all the press regarding the shady finances of SUNY’s Research Foundation, “artvoice” decided to check in on the status of who is actually running this shady and very secretive private research foundation that has access without accountability to hundreds of millions ($132 million) in public funding.

The group handled $132,000,000 in state funds for construction projects in Buffalo. As reported in The Great UB Heist:

Who are the directors of the Buffalo 2020 Development Corporation? James Weyhenmeyer, the chairman, is also vice president and managing director of the Technology Accelerator Fund at the SUNY Research Foundation. Satish Tripathi, the vice chairman, is the newly-named officer-in-charge of UB and soon to be president.

Buffalo 2020 Development Corporation board members are: David Dunn, vice president for Health Sciences at SUNY Buffalo; Scott Nostaja, who abruptly resigned as senior vice president and chief operations officer at SUNY Buffalo on March 23; John J. O’Connor, senior vice chancellor for Research and Innovation, secretary of SUNY, and president of the Research Foundation of SUNY; Edward P. Schneider, executive director of the UB Foundation; and former UB President John B. Simpson.

Since then, Scott Nostaja quit his job at UB and has resigned from the corporation. Under intense scrutiny, John O’Connor left his positions at SUNY and the SUNY Research Foundation and resigned from the corporation. John Simpson, who quit as UB President, retains his position in the corporation. So does David Dunn, who recently quit his job at UB to go to the University of Louisville. Current UB President Satish Tripathi also retains his position.

The group is supposed to have a meeting in July, but they contend they are not subject to the Open Meetings Law.

Read more: http://blogs.artvoice.com/avdaily/2011/06/24/buffalo-2020-development-corporation-in-flux/#ixzz1QIkXNtHv

Feds Probing Medicaid Fraud at SUNY Research Foundation

A federal criminal investigation into systemic fraud related to audits of New York's Medicaid program is targeting numerous supervisors and employees at the state Health Department and the Research Foundation for the State University of New York.

Interviews with people familiar with the matter and documents obtained by the Times Union show that in recent weeks at least seven employees with those agencies received letters from federal prosecutors in Albany notifying them they are targets in the investigation. The letters say evidence is being prepared for presentation to a federal grand jury for indictment in a case involving fraud, health care fraud, falsification of records and conspiracy.

The targeted employees were encouraged to contact prosecutors to discuss a pre-indictment settlement, and to consult attorneys if necessary. The letters were sent by assistant U.S. Attorney Sara Lord, who specializes in white-collar crime cases.

Federal investigators with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services are pursuing whether the scandal reaches into the upper levels of management for the SUNY Research Foundation and the state Health Department, according to sources briefed on the case. At stake is more than $22 billion in annual matching federal funds for Medicaid. The allegations are that Research Foundation workers, who were under contract with the state Health Department to audit the program, were pushed to manipulate data related to the percentage of ineligible people receiving benefits.

On Saturday, the Research Foundation issued a written statement that shifted focus to an arm of the Research Foundation in Buffalo. People briefed on the investigation said workers at the foundation's Albany headquarters are targets of the probe.

People familiar with the case said several Research Foundation workers have alleged they were fired or retaliated against after questioning the practice of altering data or manipulating information such as residency requirements of Medicaid recipients.


One such employee, Ava Dock, filed a civil complaint against the Research Foundation in U.S. District Court alleging that Research Foundation's ''purpose to underreport New York's error rate for Medicaid claims was to defraud the federal government ... in order to avoid the disallowance of federal matching funds for Medicaid to New York,''


The Research Foundation considers itself a private, not-for-profit agency though its leaders are mostly made up of top SUNY officials. The foundation handles about $1 billion annually in revenues, mostly in research grants from the federal government. Its workers also routinely conduct business on behalf of the state through government contracts, and many of its employees have state government jobs and state e-mail addresses.

This is not the first time NYS and SUNY Research Foundation Have Been Investigated for Fraud

http://www.timesunion.com/local/article/Feds-probing-Medicaid-fraud-at-SUNY-firm-557890.php#page-2

Value of a College Degree is crashing faster than the housing market

Children in the U.S. are taught that a college education is the ticket to a good job. But the cost of a college education is rising, and the supposed benefits are more elusive than conventional wisdom would suppose. The National Inflation Association reveals the scam behind the myth of the college education.No wonder, then, that according to Time Magazine, a recent poll shows that:

“... a majority of Americans think colleges fail to deliver enough bang for their buck. Of 2,142 adults surveyed, 57 percent said the higher education system in the U.S. fails to provide students with good value for the money they and their families spend.

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2011/06/03/is-a-college-education-the-biggest-scam-in-us-history.aspx

Colleges only interested in lining their own pockets
1. Federal grant and loan programs allow college costs to be overinflated for the value being offered at Colleges
2. Textbooks is a kickback industry
3. College tutition has 5%+ price inflation even though the housing market is down over 20% and the dow is down 18%. College is the only thing in America except for healthcare that did not decline in price.
4. College costs over $100k and you are NOT guaranteed a job.

A senior in high school that invests $30k in i.e. silver would be able to buy a median priced home in 4 years. Whereas his contemporaries going to college will come out over $100k in debt and NO JOB.

Total cost of college:

$186,000 college degree
$61,000 interest paying college loans
$212,000 lost income
________________________________________

Total cost of college: $460,000

Disclaimer: the posted video is a commercial to buy gold and silver and National Institute of Inflation. We do

Public school, private dealings

As the State University of New York looks for more independence, it should be doing all it can to earn the public's trust. Instead, SUNY wraps itself in the cloak of secrecy that already shrouds the SUNY Research Foundation.

The university refuses to release a report on its relationship with the Research Foundation. So much for shedding some light on this rather covert entity that handles $1 billion in grants annually and has been tainted by corruption and patronage allegations for years. SUNY says the report is "privileged."

And therein lies the problem -- with a secret foundation, with SUNY's outrageous pay hikes and housing allowances for top administrators, with a possible no-show job for the daughter of a former Senate majority leader, with the suggestion that higher education is beyond scrutiny: The air of privilege that SUNY exudes is sometimes breathtaking.

The report, done by legal consultant Hogan Lovells US LLP, is on the "Research Foundation/SUNY relationship." Paid for with $290,000 in public funds, the report is said to offer a comprehensive look at the Research Foundation. But Chancellor Nancy Zimpher, who commissioned the report shortly after coming to SUNY in 2009, considers it protected by lawyer-client privilege. SUNY won't even say why she had the report done in the first place.

So let's get this straight: The state-funded SUNY had to pay nearly $300,000 to understand its own murky relationship with the Research Foundation, yet the public that foots the bill for SUNY is told, "none of your business"?

It's all the more of public interest right now, when SUNY Vice Chancellor John J. O'Connor, who also headed the Research Foundation for 15 years, is facing charges from the state Commission on Public Integrity that he hired Susan Bruno, daughter of former Republican Senate leader Joseph L. Bruno, for a no-show job as Mr. O'Connor's special assistant. She resigned the $84,120-a-year job in 2009 amid Times Union inquiries about it. Mr. O'Connor denies the charges and has even asked that a court create an entity to monitor the commission's handling of his case.

Ms. Zimpher, who in recent weeks has been out talking about SUNY's contributions to the state, must appreciate as a public official that she has to take the bad with the good -- and divulge both whether she likes it or not.

If she and the trustees want the Legislature to give SUNY so much independence -- to set tuition, forge private partnerships and manage its affairs without legislative approval -- they have to show that SUNY is willing to be accountable to the public.

And if SUNY refuses, then other state officials should ask why.

This might be a good place for Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli and Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, who have teamed up to investigate and prosecute corruption in state government, to get started. The comptroller's and attorney general's offices, it's worth noting, were parties to the 1977 agreement that formalized the Research Foundation's role as fiscal administrator for SUNY's grants. It makes perfect sense that they'd want to look at how the foundation is handling things, starting with an audit by the comptroller.

And then let the rest of us in on the secret.

THE ISSUE:

SUNY says a report of keen public interest is "privileged."

THE STAKES:

Secrecy doesn't help SUNY's cause for greater public trust.

NY. Public School, Private dealings

State University of New York refuses to release a report - paid for with $290,000 in public funds - on its relationship with the Research Foundation.

The State University of New York ("SUNY') wraps itself in the cloak of secrecy of the SUNY Research Foundation.

The university refuses to release a report on its relationship with the Research Foundation. So much for shedding some light on this rather covert entity that handles $1 billion in grants annually and has been tainted by corruption and patronage allegations for years. SUNY says the report is "privileged."

SUNY RESEARCH - under investigation for covering up $22 billion medicaid fraud
http://www.timesunion.com/local/article/Were-state-audits-faked-598325.phphttp://www.timesunion.com/local/article/Feds-probing-Medicaid-fraud-at-SUNY-firm-557890.php

NOT SUNY RESEARCH'S FIRST FRAUD

http://oig.hhs.gov/oas/reports/region2/29302006.pdf

And therein lies the problem -- with a secret foundation, with SUNY's outrageous pay hikes and housing allowances for top administrators, with a possible no-show job for the daughter of a former Senate majority leader, with the suggestion that higher education is beyond scrutiny: The air of privilege that SUNY exudes is sometimes breathtaking.

The report, done by legal consultant Hogan Lovells US LLP, is on the "Research Foundation/SUNY relationship." Paid for with $290,000 in public funds, the report is said to offer a comprehensive look at the Research Foundation. But Chancellor Nancy Zimpher, who commissioned the report shortly after coming to SUNY in 2009, considers it protected by lawyer-client privilege. SUNY won't even say why she had the report done in the first place.

So let's get this straight: The state-funded SUNY had to pay nearly $300,000 to understand its own murky relationship with the Research Foundation, yet the public that foots the bill for SUNY is told, "none of your business"?

It's all the more of public interest right now, when SUNY Vice Chancellor John J. O'Connor, who also headed the Research Foundation for 15 years, is facing charges from the state Commission on Public Integrity that he hired Susan Bruno, daughter of former Republican Senate leader Joseph L. Bruno, for a no-show job as Mr. O'Connor's special assistant. She resigned the $84,120-a-year job in 2009 amid Times Union inquiries about it. Mr. O'Connor denies the charges and has even asked that a court create an entity to monitor the commission's handling of his case.

And if SUNY refuses, then other state officials should ask why.

This might be a good place for Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli and Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, who have teamed up to investigate and prosecute corruption in state government, to get started. The comptroller's and attorney general's offices, it's worth noting, were parties to the 1977 agreement that formalized the Research Foundation's role as fiscal administrator for SUNY's grants. It makes perfect sense that they'd want to look at how the foundation is handling things, starting with an audit by the comptroller.

And then let the rest of us in on the secret.

Read more:

How Not To Hide A Secret Love Child - Baby LK Report For May 29th 2011

Baby LK recaps the week in news for the child protection industry.

Cornell Dairy Fraud

The fraudulent actions of Cornell University against the CoPulsation™ Milking System are not a first for the university.

In 1992 Cornell University published two studies in the Journal of Dairy Science on the topic of stray voltage in dairy herds. Michael Behr, Ph.D., a Forensic Economist, was successful in forcing the university to release the raw data behind those two studies. Behr’s evaluation of those two studies yielded a singular solid conclusion – the research is a fraud. A multi-hundred document produced by Behr provides a thorough statistical analysis supporting the conclusion of fraud. Behr’s analysis has stood up to numerous legal proceedings.

Behr summarized a comparison of the Cornell actions in the stray voltage studies to those actions taken in the Cornell study of the CoPulsation™ Milking System with the following:

Behr: Cornell promoted its relationship with big-money public utility interests
Gehm: Cornell promoted its relationship with big-money dairy equipment and pharmaceutical interests

Behr: Research results contrary to field experience and other research
Gehm: Research results contrary to field experience and other research

Behr: Attempt to give conclusions validity by using a "long" time period (full lactation)
Gehm: Attempt to give conclusions validity by using a "long" time period (one year)

Behr: Samples biased toward non-significance by using lower producing cows in the 0 voltage group
Gehm: Samples biased toward non-significance by using Staph aureus cows in the CoPulsation™ systems group

Behr: Research results published in the Journal of Dairy Science
Gehm: Research results published in the Journal of Dairy Science

Behr: Obstructionist behavior from Cornell in acquisition of public information raw data
Gehm: Obstructionist behavior from Cornell in acquisition of public information raw data

Behr: Unresponsiveness from Cornell administration upon confrontation
Gehm: Unresponsiveness from Cornell administration upon confrontation

Behr: No response from Journal of Dairy Sciences (Les Hanson> after being informed of problems
Gehm: No response from Journal of Dairy Sciences (John Fugay> after being informed of problems

Behr: Probable invalid systems and procedures re input of electricity
Gehm: Invalid equipment and procedures in the conventional systems control sample

Disclosure: Cornell has annual multi-million dollar contracts with the State of NY to inspect dairy farms. Cornell makes a lot of money annually much of it would be lost if cows were able to be kept healthier. Thus unhealthy cows is in Cornell's financial interest.

COLLEGE DEGREE SCAM REVISITED

Student loan debt outpaced credit card debt for the first time last year and is likely to top a trillion dollars this year.

The amount of debt is so high that people will be paying their own student loans off when it's time for their kids to go to college according to Mark Kantrowitz, the publisher of FinAid.org and Fastweb.com, who has compiled the estimates of student debt, including federal and private loans.

Debt Slavery - America is making indentured servants out of students

Things like buying a home, starting a family, starting a business, saving for their own kids’ education may not be options for people who are paying off a lot of student debt.

According to "Decline of the Empire" Student Loans - Gateway to Debt Slavery
1.To get a job, any job, your chances improve significantly with a college degree
2.The cost of a college degree has risen 439% in the last 28 years
3.Obtaining a degree is far beyond the means of most young people
4.To get a degree, and thus have any hope of getting a job, the large majority of young people must become debt slaves

The easy access to Federal loans is good for the Ivory Tower, but not so good for the American public.

Here is an absurd quote from the self-interested "brain trust".
"College [where tuition has risen 439% in 28 years] is still a really good deal." Cecilia Rouse, Princeton.

Comment: no!! College is NOT a really good deal. When college tuition was $2,500 not $25,000 a year. That was a good deal.

Comment: no wonder peer review has become the research tool of choice. If the brain trusts at the Universities had to ask the opinion of people living in the real world, no one would agree with their idiocy.


While a boatload of student debt is certainly a good deal for Princeton, or the University of Michigan, which get to use Federal loans to allow students to pay their tuition money up front and raise tuition prices to levels higher than their actual market value, through one outrageous tuition hike after another, it's a lousy deal for taxpayers and students.

The school bill along with the retirement debt this country has racked up - young people are going to be indentured to the government, not the other way around.

The College Scam: 4 year colleges voted America's most overrated and overpriced product

Colleges and politicians tell students, "Your life will be much better if you go to college. Like the unveiling of the mortgage crisis, people are realizing that colleges are selling a C-rated product at AAA rated prices.

One common scenario, a student is told that they will make more than a million dollars more over the course of a lifetime with a college degree, so they borrow the average price of tuition or 24,000 a year. At the time the student finishes college he/she is $100,000 in debt.

Investment 101 Math

1. it takes on average 5 years to graduate college which is 5 years of lost income.

2. Students are coming out of 4 year degrees with $100,000 worth of debt

Assuming a loan payment rate of $10k/year on the student debt, the student is out 5 years of income for the time attending school and 10 years of paying back $10k in student loan debt. Assuming that instead of not-working and acquiring debt the student worked for 5 years and put 10k in an investment account where money generally doubles every 10 years. After 15 years, the non-student would have over $250,000 just from the money s/he did not have to go into debt to pay for college. In 25 the same non-student would have $500,000 and in 35 years, $1,000,000.

Not only does the college student lose out in lost earnings and interest for 5 years, but has to pay back money and interest after college so the time where money has the most time to grown in a person's early years, is lost.

Ask any retirement planner. A person that puts money away in their 20s and 30s will be much better off if they put in no money afterwards than a person that starts investing in their 40s.

It is no misstatement that "The bachelor's degree? It's America's most overrated [and overpriced] product," says education consultant and career counselor Dr. Marty Nemko (http://tinyurl.com/b27ojp).

Nemko is also a disbeliever of University claims that college students make a million-dollar bonus over their lifetime. "There could be no more misleading statistic," . First, just look at the numbers above. Secon, the statistic misleads because many successful college kids would have been successful whether they went to college or not.

The statistic is a false product of self-serving college presidents and politicians eager to buy political favor by burdening young people with debt. Higher enrollments and government loan programs may be good for them , but they are making lots of our kids miserable, indentured and poor.

The College Rip Off

These days most of colleges money come from Federal grant programs that will either be for

1. worthless research,


2. research that is spun into businesses with intellectual property paid for with taxpayer money with no corresponding discount to the investors (taxpayers) that funded the business in the first place, or


3. University sponsored (another name for taxpayer subsidized) programs i.e. cultural training that Universities are providing for social workers being paid for with social security funds.


4. Federal college loans that 25% of students are defaulting on, but colleges are still getting paid 100% of the money

In fact student debt just surpassed the country's credit-card debt for the first time. It is projected to top $1 trillion in 2011.

While a college degree has value, the question is whether the value is worth the price of admission.

Currently colleges are charging tuition amounts and increasing tuition rates at a much faster rate than the economy is growing or salaries are justifying. There is also some discussion of the quality of the education being provided.

For instance, full-time instructional faculty dropped from 78% in 1970 to 52% in 2005. On average faculty spends 11 hours/week on instruction and the remainder of their time devoted to research.

The hiring binge on campus has been devoted to managerial professionals and government-sponsored programs aka subsidized businesses.

Colleges are also boasting the unimpressive statistics of having only 1/3 of its class graduate in 4 years, 2/3 of its class graduating within 6 years and the remaining 1/3 of its class not graduate at all.

Not many, if any, high schools (public or private) charging $25k/year would stay afloat boasting a graduation rate of 66%.

There are some suggestions on the horizon including dismanteling the current architecture of financial aid which (like the mortgage crisis) drives up the costs of education in a never-ending cycle and giving help only to the truly needy students who are performing well academically.

The American Enterprise Institute, is pusching for other ways for young people to be credentialed other than a BA.

Rick Perry of Texas is embarking on a controversial push to get Universities and specifically state universities to focus on education rather than federal grant funding maximization schemes to fund obscure research and government supported programs better served by private enterprise.

Student Loan Crisis by the Numbers

• Over $100 billion in federal education loans are originated every year.



• In 2009 $11.5 billion of loan principal was in default.



• $23.6 billion in defaulted loans in the FFEL program



• $23.8 billion in defaulted loans in Direct Loan program

TOTAL OVERALL DEFAULT $47.4 billion

• The estimated total private student loan debt outstanding as of June 30, 2009 was about $157.8 billion.



• Public sector workers are NOT required to pay back their loans after 10 years of service.



• Of college graduates age 25 and under, 22.4% are not working at all, 22% are working in jobs that require NO college degree.

• Over the last 20 years, universities and colleges have doubled their full-time support staff. At the same time enrollment only increased 40%. Full-time instructors increased about 50% and managers increased about 50%.



• Public universities and colleges have increased their tuition by as much as 30% for the 2010-2011 year.
  



• Story Link

University of Georgia Numbers are Wrong. City Cuts Half Estimated Budget

By 1989, the city of Sandy Springs, just north of Atlanta, had had enough. The city of about 90,000 people had grown tired of paying high taxes to Fulton County, and seeing virtually no local investments or improvements. People in the city thought they could do better on their own. They were right.

For years, lawmakers from the area would draft and propose bills for incorporation, and every year legislators from neighboring cities in the county blocked them, probably because they didn’t want to lose the big chunk of tax revenue that came from the area. By 2005, HB37, a bill for incorporation, was passed and signed by Governor Sonny Purdue. When voters went to the ballots to approve the referendum, they voted overwhelmingly in favor by 94%.

What happened next was an experiment that proved to be quite innovative. The city outsourced nearly all of its city services. Garbage management, street maintenance, communications, technology, traffic services…all of it was handled by private companies, and handled well.

The University of Georgia had estimated in a study that the city would need a staff of 828 employees for the city to function. Another example of how the ivory tower is out of touch with reality and insulates itself from competition and competitive prices.

They city has employed about 471 since incorporation, and only 271 are public employees, relying on tax dollars. The Mayor of Sandy Springs, Eva Galambos, told John Stossel in 2010, “We have fewer employees than the city to the north of us and we have exactly the same population.”

Sandy Springs began use of their own police and fire departments in 2006, which today employs 128 officers and 97 firefighters respectively. However, city officials say there is no burden of long-term pension or healthcare costs. From inception, neither department has participated in defined benefit plans. Both use defined contribution plans, similar to 401(k) s. In addition health insurance is dealt with much like private savings accounts. According to a report from Reason Magazine, the public safety departments use some of the most innovative technology available.

Public schools remain under the broader district control of Fulton County, but other than that, the city currently let’s a contracting firm designate all other city services. The Colorado-based private contracting firm CH2M Hill is the managing partner with a large group of subcontractors. For every need Sandy Springs faces, the firm contracts out to the specialized company who can do the work most efficiently and least expensively.

This hybrid model to run a city has proven to be a success economically. According to Reason, the cost to run a city the size of Sandy Springs should cost around $50 million a year, but by contracting out to CH2M, it cost the city half of that, about $25 million. The city was able to build up its reserves, re-pave 90 miles of road, construct award-winning parks, and implement a state of the art traffic system, which has saved drivers about $12 million, in fuel and time, over a two year period. At the same time, the city has not had to raise any taxes.

The model has achieved notice. In 2010, the city was the runner-up for the Pioneer Institute’s 2010 Better Government Competition Award. The award is presented for innovative ideas and programs that improve effectiveness and efficiency of government. Citizens seem to approve of the new model too. During the first election after incorporation, every incumbent was re-elected for office. In fact, the lowest margin for re-election for any of the incumbents was 84%.

According to a recent article from the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, other cities in Georgia are considering joining the hybrid-city model.

This month, Sandy Springs voted to award contracts out for information and financial services, and they still have five departments in the bidding process including court services, parks and recreation, and public works.

http://www.thefreeenterprisenation.org/blog/FEN-Blog/April-2011/Sandy-Springs,-GA--The-city-of-the-future.aspx

University of TX Advisor Fired After Whistleblowing

Government Taxes, Texas, Education (public sector)

Rick O’Donnell, a special advisor to the University of Texas System Board of Regents, said he was fired from his position after being denied access to data that he claimed would show an increase in the amount of taxpayer money being spent on professors and administrators who spend little or no time teaching. O’Donnell previously wrote a report questioning the value of research being done at public universities. The University of Texas system denied the accusation that they withheld data, and said it has been compiled but is still in its raw form and is not yet ready to be released.

Source: (http://chronicle.com)

MORE USELESS COLLEGE DEGREES NOT NEEDED

EDUCATION INVESTMENTS CREATE MORE DEBT THAN JOBS

More taxpayer spending to send more students to college will not reduce unemployment or
improve the economy. It's just a new way of finagling the unemployment statistics by listing young people as students instead of as unemployed.

There is a falsehood being propagated that solving the unemployment problem requires "more investments in education." Investment in education is so high that graduates cannot fund their debt. Universities are the only entities whose prices are rising faster than the price of oil.

Newsflash, it's not only blue collar jobs that got shipped overseas. You can now get everything from computer programming to plastic surgery cheaper someplace else, and if you work someplace else you won't have to worry about baseless lawsuits, never ending red tape, redundant paperwork or extortionist tuition bills.

If the crash of the real estate market is any indicator of how Universities are doing compared to the taxpayers that fund them, Universities are probably the only entity not defaulting on their mortgages and actually acquiring more property with your, our, taxpayer money while the people that pay for them default.

The Center for College Affordability and Productivity found that approximately 60 percent of the increase in the number of college graduates from 1992 to 2008 now work in relatively low-skilled jobs that need only a high-school diploma or less. The actual count is 17.4 million college grads working in occupations such as cashier, waiter, waitress or bartender.

Given the current state of the so called "professional fields" medical and legal field, the waiter, waitress or bartender probably makes more money, has a better quality of life, less debt and less stress and can actually have a life outside of work.

The fact that there is no education improvement even while spending has skyrocketed is a disaster unparalleled in any other field. Taxing people trillions of dollars for political paybacks to worthless programs.

DEFAULTED. University Degrees - Not Worth The Money

University Degrees Don't Pay for Themselves.
Maybe it's time for the Feds to back out of the picture and allow the cost and focus of Higher Education to re-align itself to the reality of the country and job market.

Forty-one percent of federal student loan borrowers who started repayment in 2005 have either defaulted on their loans or have been delinquent on their loans at some point, according to this report.

The study found that although 15 percent– or 258,404 students representing $3.2 billion in loans – actually defaulted on their loans, the percentage of people who have trouble repaying their loans, but never actually default, is much higher.

Twenty-six percent – or 454,000 borrowers, representing $8.5 billion in loans – were delinquent at some point, but never defaulted.

According to the study 750,000 students are having difficulty repaying their loans in a timely fashion.

Conclusion: The cost of a higher education degree is higher than the return on the degree.

Economy in Crisis But Higher Education Receives Record Amounts of Public Funding

In 2009 Kansas University received a record amount of external and public funding - $207.1 million.

The total funding represents a $9 million increase from the 2008 fiscal year. About 83 percent (or $170 million) of the funding came from the federal government. The rest of the money came from external research grants.

More Proof that Universities Operate In Ivory Towers Removed From Fiscal Realities

Tuition Fees to Increase 5.9% next year.

The annual rate of inflation is 1.6% according to the consumer price index.

Dartmouth Board of Trustees just approved a 5.9% increase in tuition, room, board and fees for 2001-2012 academic year or $55,365/year total. Dartmouth is currently the most expensive of the seven Ivy League schools.

The cost of room, board and fees for undergraduate students will rise from $12,297 to $13,629, representing an overall 10.83-percent increase. Undergraduate tuition will increase by 4.4 percent in the 2011-2012 academic year, from $39,978 to $41,736.

Cornell University’s undergraduate costs increased by 4.5 percent, The Harvard Crimson reported. At $54,645, Cornell’s costs for the next academic year are closest to Dartmouth’s figure.

Undergraduate costs at Princeton University will increase by one percent to total $49,069 — the lowest in the Ivy League — for the upcoming academic year, according to a Princeton press release.

Harvard University increased its undergraduate costs by 3.8 percent to $52,650 for the 2011-2012 academic year, while Yale University undergraduate fees rose to $52,700, representing a 5.8-percent increase over the previous year, according to press releases from the Universities. Undergraduate costs increased by 3.5 percent at Brown University and 3.9 percent at the University of Pennsylvania.

Columbia University has not yet released the cost of undergraduate tution and fees for the 2011-2012 academic year.

Supreme Court to Interpret Bayh- Dole Act

A recent case concerning intellectual property (IP) rights centers around a Stanford University researcher and several patents he authored concerning HIV nucleic acid measurement,is serious enough to be brought before the supreme court.

Stanford University researcher Mark Holodniy had an agreement with the college, which included language that he would “agree to assign” patent rights to it. However, he also had a consulting agreement with a small start up company that collaborated with the university on the research, and signed another document that stated “I do assign my rights,” it was more of a contract.

Stanford sued stating that because because the work was done with government funding (even though Stanford is a private University), it was privy to the government’s rights.

It is expected that Supreme Court will discuss government rights and implications under the Bayh-Dole Act. The legislation was written to facilitate technology transfers outside of research. “The act was written to foster development that could be commercialized so more people benefit,” she says. “But under the act the government would retain certain rights.”

The Supreme Court will interpret the act, which they have not done before.

IL. 2500 US Universities. University of Ilinois gets $800 million in research grants

State's universities urged to partner for more research funding



The University of Illinois and the state's other major academic institutions must do a better job partnering with business and political leaders to bring more research funding to the state, U. of I. board Chairman Christopher Kennedy urged Tuesday.

Kennedy, in a speech to the City Club of Chicago, argued that garnering more research grants –- which would then lead to new ideas, new companies and new jobs — would fuel a "job-creation machine" needed in the economically troubled state.


U. of I. currently brings in about $800 million annually in research funds, including about $250 million to UIC.

Question: How many jobs did this create?

Question: Where did the money ($800 million) come from? Taxpayers?

Question: How much in taxes did University of Illinois pay on the money it received? Nothing?

Fact: There are over 2500 Universities and Colleges in the United States. If only 10 received what U of I received that would be $8 billion in research grants. If only 100 received what U of I received that would be $80 billion in research grants. If only 1000 received what U of I received that would be $800 billion in research grants.

Fact: There is so much wasted taxpayer money going into Higher Education, the Federal and State Governments know about the fraud and waste and refuse to investigate or prosecute.

Fact: With Universities getting this much taxpayer money, why is there tuition at all, much less tuition that rises at a rate many times the rate of inflation?

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-chris-kennedy-brief-20110301,0,751983.

More University Spin. Ithaca College Increases Tuition 4.76% "Lowest Tuition Hike in 9 years)

Ithaca College's board of trustees approved a 4.76 percent increase in tuition for next year that will raise the price of tuition and standard room and board to $48,132.

According to a statement from the college, the trustees approved the hike at their Feb. 16-17 meeting. The 4.76 percent increase marks the smallest rate of increase in tuition, room and board since 2002-2003.

The Consumer Price Index for the 12-month period ending in January shows a rate of inflation of 1.6 percent.


"That is something we hope will be taken into account by current and prospective students as a sign of diligence and prudence in trying to balance the costs for them with the expense of providing high-quality education," said Dave Maley, spokesman for the college.
IC tuition next year will be $35,278, with fees for standard room and board set at $12,854.

Only a University could spin keeping tuition hikes to a mere 4 times the annual rate of inflation as good economic policy.

Tuition for students in the university's endowed colleges would be $41,325, about a 4.7 percent increase. New York state resident students in Cornell's statutory colleges would pay $25,185, about an 8 percent increase, while tuition for non-state residents in the statutory colleges would also be $41,325.

At the current "low 4.76% yearly increase" of the tuition hike, tuition costs will be about $73,000 by 2020 if they can keep it at that low 4.76% yearly increase.
All this press release shows is a need for price controls.

http://www.theithacajournal.com/article/20110221/NEWS01/102210325/1124/VideoNetwork/Ithaca-College-s-4-76-tuition-hike-lowest-9-years?odyssey=nav%7Chead

College Republicans funding improper

College Republicans funding improper

By Mike Donohue | Friday, February 4, 2011

This year, 21 months before the presidential elections, the Conservative Political Action Conference will feature keynotes by presidential contenders such as Newt Gingrich, Michelle Bachmann and Tim Pawlenty. Attending the event will be 13 members of the College Republicans. They will be doing so, supporting these political candidates, using Student Activity Fee (SAF).

Joint Finance Committee policy prohibits the use of the SAF for political activities. CPAC certainly qualifies as a political activity. While College Republicans may claim that CPAC is simply a networking opportunity for its members, the purpose of the Conference goes well beyond that. The conference attendees conduct a straw poll each year, naming their top picks for the Republican presidential nomination. Candidates use CPAC keynotes to push their campaigns, hoping to curry favor with the conservative wing of their party. These are the activities of an organization that supports a political agenda and can make or break the career of a budding Republican nominee.

JFC never considered the possibility that this bill violated the political activities clause of JFC policy. Any bill put forward by the College Republicans (or the College Democrats for that matter) ought to be scrutinized carefully to make sure it does not violate this rule. Although GSS did fail the bill, there was no debate at all, save for a single statement of opposition by AE Sen. Michael Ellis. No one mentioned the fact that CPAC is a partisan activity, and no one thought to fight for the failure or the passage of the bill based on what they thought SGA ought to finance with the SAF.

UHR, though it did debate the bill at length, got bogged down in details, distracted by miscommunications and errors among UHR, GSS, JFC and College Republicans. Based on this confusion alone, UHR should have failed or postponed the bill and asked College Republicans to come back the following week. Although this would have prevented College Republicans from using the funds since the event would have been completed by the time funds would have been available, it would have served as an apt warning to student organizations to be prepared before asking for a rushed decision from SGA.

Regardless of the procedural confusion that resulted from the debate, UHR completely failed to consider the wisdom of the bill. Not one representative asked his or her colleagues to pause and consider the ramifications of funding a political activity. No one brought up JFC policy. No one uttered even the weakest of opposition.

However, both student body presidents have the opportunity to correct this error. Undergraduate Corey T. Boone and Graduate President Anthony Baldridge can use their veto pens to make sure that the SAF is properly spent. They should do so quickly and with confidence.

Why did the bill get as far as it did? In part, the bill’s success is due to the Chairman of College Republicans, Kristen Greig. Greig stood on the floor of UHR through the entirety of debate Tuesday evening, speaking up with commentary and support. This was in violation of House rules, but she was rarely reminded of that fact. Greig had also presented earlier that evening, leading the HOPE Open Forum. Perhaps this is why the Representatives were comfortable with her causally participating in debate. The fact that she could represent the student body in a political issue as important as HOPE and then turn around to represent the interests of College Republicans, a goal of which is to elect candidates who hold Republican ideals, is troubling.

Greig should remove this conflict of interest immediately by resigning as either Student Lobby Board Chair or as Chair of the College Republicans. The members of SGA who represent the student body should not split their loyalties.

This week’s SGA meetings revealed several troubling issues with the way SGA views its relationship with partisan political activities. With tough fights over the future of HOPE and the budget about to peak, it’s important that the representatives of the student body rededicate themselves to the people who elected them: the student body.