September 16-17, 2013
Sep 16 11:01 Where's MnSCU's enrollment report? Sep 16 05:54 Political class takes a hit Sep 16 10:40 Barbarians at the campus gates Sep 16 15:47 Activists/Thugs 'confiscate' private property Sep 16 20:37 Open letter to Chancellor Rosenstone Sep 17 14:34 Buffett: Get rid of PPACA
Prior Months: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug
Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Where's MnSCU's enrollment report?
Last Monday was the tenth day that MnSCU universities were back for fall semester. At the end of business that day, the data should've been compiled for MnSCU's 10-day enrollment report. Select members of each university's Faculty Association have been looking at the enrollment data since classes started.
What's sinister is the fact that MnSCU's had a week to compile a report that's updated daily. The next question is to ask why it's taken MnSCU that long to compile the report. It isn't that I'm expecting the report to be published first thing Tuesday morning. It's that it shouldn't take a week.
The next question I'd ask is what's causing this extended in publishing the report. I can't prove what's behind the delay. I certainly can speculate, though. At SCSU's first Meet & Confer meeting, President Potter insisted multiple times that enrollment at SCSU would be down 5%. The basis for this post was Dr. Tom Fauchald's Sept. 4th report, which was based on MnSCU's enrollment figures. According to MnSCU's data, St. Cloud State's enrollment was down 12% as of Sept. 4, 2013.
It isn't possible to think that SCSU's enrollment will 'just' be down 5% when MnSCU's statistics show them down by 12% a week into the school year. I won't say that MnSCU is witholding the report to hide SCSU's declining enrollment. Proving that assertion would be difficult at best.
It's worth noting that SCSU didn't report their 30-day number last year until after the midterms. The consensus then was that they didn't publish the report because their numbers were that hideous. In terms of headcount figures, SCSU was down more than 800 students from the fall 2011 report. If SCSU is down 5% this year, that means SCSU's enrollment will decline another 800 students. There's a distinct possibility that SCSU's headcount enrollment will be down 8% this year.
This graphic shows the enrollment trends since 2007:
That graph doesn't paint a pretty picture for SCSU. MnSCU's failure to publish a report they've had the data for since last week is almost as troubling as SCSU's enrollment numbers. Putting things in context, though, the budgetary impact of SCSU's declining enrollment is what's most unsettling.
That MnSCU hasn't published a report is troubling. The budgetary impact of SCSU's declining enrollment is frightening.
Posted Monday, September 16, 2013 11:01 AM
No comments.
Political class takes a hit
One of the things that's becoming clear this year is that the political class doesn't understand the United States. This weekend, I've read 2 articles that illustrate that perfectly. First, Scott Rasmussen's article cuts through the clutter quickly:
2013 has been a tough year for the political class. The most recent evidence comes from Colorado.
Earlier in the year, the political elites in Washington were certain gun control would be enacted following the horrific massacre at a Connecticut elementary school. When nothing passed, they expected politicians who refused to support more gun restrictions would face consequences for their actions.
There were consequences. Just not the one's the political class expected.
After Colorado passed its own version of gun control legislation, two state senators were targeted by a grassroots effort for removal through a recall vote. It was the first time in the state's history that the recall process had even been attempted. Outside money poured in, and gun control advocates outspent the NRA and its allies by a 6-to-1 margin. Despite the tremendous financial advantage they enjoyed, both state senators were removed from office because of their support for gun control legislation.
Simply put, in state after state, gun control activists misunderestimated the people's love of freedom. I don't mistake this as a newfound love of the Constitution amongst the masses. It isn't that. It's that people want the ability to defend themselves.
An early sign of trouble for the elites came with public reaction to the so-called sequester. More precisely, the D.C. panic was caused by the lack of public reaction.
Politicians, mainstream media organizations, defense contractors and others did everything they could to scare the public. President Obama himself used his State of the Union address to say, 'These sudden, harsh, arbitrary cuts would jeopardize our military readiness.' To make sure voters understood his concern, he added, 'They'd devastate priorities like education, energy and medical research. They would certainly slow our recovery and cost us hundreds of thousands of jobs.'
But it didn't work. People didn't rise up in revolt and demand that Congress stop the sequester.
Instead, voters recognized that the politicians were crying wolf. The so-called cuts were not harsh and devastating. They were embarrassingly modest. In fact, all the sequester really did was reduce the growth of federal spending a bit. So, when the sequester went into effect, there was no revolt. Instead, hardly anybody noticed. Only those who work for the government really felt any impact.
For a week straight or more, the administration trotted out cabinet secretaries to tell the public that life would end if the sequester happened. The only thing missing from their presentations were illustrations of the Apocalypse as a backdrop.
Instead, we felt a pin prick.
The other article that illustrates how out of touch DC is is Salena Zito's fantastic article titled Main Street wants action on jobs, not blunders on Syria :
CHAMPION, Pa. - Tracey loaded three large cardboard boxes with tomatoes, peaches, green beans, cucumbers and fleshy beets for a young couple about to embark on their first adventure in the art of canning. Rows of perfectly presented vegetables lined the shelves of her family's farmers market, where State Route 31 meets the base of a mountain.
The young couple peppered her with questions about 'putting up' their produce as they recalled watching their parents filling cellars with canned vegetables and fruits that lasted from autumn through spring.
They also chatted about jobs and ways to cut corners; all three expressed worry about an economy that has not improved for more than a half-decade.
Behind them in line, a group of young people discussed the possibility of war with Syria, all of them astonished that this is what the White House is focused on. 'We keep waiting for the White House to talk about jobs in a meaningful, constructive way so that our families, communities and schools stop crumbling,' said one young woman as she contemplated buying fresh honey.
This administration hasn't deviated from its original economic plan of dumping lots of money into the economy, first through the stimulus, then through the Fed's quantitative easing. It isn't that the plan failed totally. It hasn't. Still, economic growth has been stagnant to the point that we went from the housing bubble collapse to the Great Recession to today's Great Stagnation.
Coming out of one of the nastiest recessions in US history, President Reagan instituted massive tax cuts, including cuts in the capital gains rates. In September, 1983, the US economy created 1,100,000 jobs. In August, I cited some disturbing statistics from Zerohedge's post in this post :
Of 953,000 Jobs Created In 2013, 77%, Or 731,000 Are Part-Time
Think about those statistics juxtaposed against Reagan's jobs report for September, 1983. Reagan created more fulltime jobs in a single month than this president has created jobs, full- and part-time, in half a year.
Meanwhile, when people still trusted government, Reagan took down the Soviet Union. Fast forward to today, where President Obama and his Secretary of State can't even get on the same page to deliver a pin prick attack against Syria.
President Reagan's strength was his trusting the American people to do the right thing. President Obama's weakness is his insistance that he's always right. People have proposed plans for a stronger economy. President Obama has ignored those blueprints. People have proposed things to fix the biggest mistakes in the PPACA. President Obama has ignored those, too, because he thinks he's right.
In his last speech from the Oval Office, President Reagan said something that I can't forget. He said "it's amazing what you can get accomplished when you don't care who gets credit for things." President Obama could mouth those words but he'd follow that up with a reminder that it's his brilliance that saved the day.
The difference is that President Reagan never forgot that he was a man of the people while President Obama can't hide the fact that he's a creature of the DC Beltway.
Posted Monday, September 16, 2013 5:54 AM
No comments.
Barbarians at the campus gates
Thomas Sowell's latest column highlights the intolerant left. This isn't an indictment of all liberals. In fact, I'd argue that it's an indictment of hardline progressives, not liberals. When Howard Dean said that "This is a battle between good and evil and we're the good", he meant it. He really viewed conservatives as evil. That's what's inspiring the people Dr. Sowell wrote about:
An all-too-familiar scene was enacted on the campus of Swarthmore College during a meeting on May 4 to discuss demands by student activists for the college to divest itself of its investments in companies that deal in fossil fuels. As a speaker was beginning a presentation to show how many millions of dollars such a disinvestment would cost the college, student activists invaded the meeting, seized the microphone, and shouted down a student who rose in the audience to object.
Although there were professors and administrators in the room, including the college president, apparently nobody had the guts to put a stop to these storm-trooper tactics. Nor is it likely that there will be any punishment of those who put their own desires above the rights of others. On the contrary, these students went on to demand mandatory campus 'teach-ins,' and the administration caved on that demand. Among their other demands are that courses on ethnic studies, and on gender and sexuality, be made a requirement for graduation.
It isn't a secret that political correctness runs rampant on college campuses. It isn't even a secret that these activists/barbarians/thugs target conservatives. See Ann Coulter and Karl Rove about that.
What hasn't been talked about is the need to stand up to these activists/thugs. I don't propose stripping these activists' First Amendment rights. That's censorship, which I can't support. What I'm advocating is for people to stand up to these activists/thugs, then verbally embarass these activists/thugs in public.
I learned early in life that the best protection against loud-mouthed bullies isn't defensive in nature. The best protection is giving bullies a bloody nose. Letting thugs know that you aren't backing down gives them something extra to think about.
Another analogy is a basketball team bringing the ball up against a full-court press. As long as the team doesn't exploit the weakness of the press, the defensive team doesn't have an incentive to stop pressing. Exploiting a press's weakness leads to easy layups in short order. Suddenly, the cost of pressing is too high.
Translating that into dealing with these activists/thugs is simple. Putting them on the spot, then ridiculing them, is a way to send the message that you aren't putting up with their crap. A perfect response might be "So you think only you have the right to speak? Who elected you dictator? What makes you think that your opinions are better or more important than mine?"
Back in the 1960s, the University of Chicago was a rare exception. As Professor George J. Stigler, a Nobel Prize-winning economist, put it in his memoirs, 'our faculty united behind the expulsion of a large number of young barbarians.'
The sky did not fall. There was no bloodbath. The University of Chicago was in fact spared some of the worst nonsense that more compliant institutions were permanently saddled with in the years that followed as a result of their failure of nerve in the '60s.
In short, they stood up to the activists/thugs. Not only did they survive, they won the fight. The key is to let these activists/thugs know that they can't win by being thugs. They'll have to win on the merits of their ideas. That thought frightens them. In fact, if they thought they could win on the merits, that's what they'd do.
This paragraph should frighten people:
It's not just academics who won't defend decency. Trustees could fire college presidents who cave in to storm-trooper tactics. Donors could stop donating to institutions that have sold out their principles to appease the campus barbarians. But when nobody is willing to defend civilized standards, the barbarians win.
This quote should be must reading for people who've been pressured by activistss/thugs:
All it takes for evil to succeed is for a few good men to do nothing. Edmund Burke
When activists/thugs do a hostile takeover of a room, that's evil. That's the time to confront the activists. That's when they need to get the message that their tactics (stunts, intimidation?) won't help them win the fight they're picking. Only then can order be restored.
Posted Monday, September 16, 2013 10:40 AM
No comments.
Activists/Thugs 'confiscate' private property
This article is, among other things, an indictment against progressive activist/thugs:
MIDDLEBURY - A memorial on the Middlebury College campus to those killed in the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks was vandalized this past Wednesday, shocking many on campus.
A leader of a group that pulled up 2,977 American flags placed in the lawn between Mead Chapel and the Davis Family Library told the Addison Independent in an exclusive interview that she had no regrets for her actions, saying she found the display offensive to Native Americans.
The flag memorial has been a tradition on campus for at least six years. It is coordinated by the college's Democratic and Republican groups.
Shortly after 2:30 p.m. this past Wednesday, junior Benjamin Harris was leaving class when he observed five people removing the flags from the lawn and placing them in plastic garbage bags. Harris, co-president of the college Republicans, and five other students had spent two hours setting up the memorial the previous evening.
At first, Harris thought the individuals were moving the flags out of the rain, as inclement weather was expected that afternoon. When he realized this was not the case, he confronted them.
Harris asked why they were tearing up the flags. When he told the individuals the memorial was commemorating those who died in New York, Washington, D.C., and Shanksville, Pa., during the attacks, he said one of them responded, 'You're commemorating the wrong deaths.' The person continued, 'This monument stands for American imperialism and we're confiscating it.'
I don't hold much hope for this happening but I'd love hearing that these activists/thugs got arrested and thrown in jail for stealing these flags. The flags belonged to the "college's Democratic and Republican groups." I'd further recommend that these activists/thugs be fined heavily for stealing these flags. Finally, I'd tell others writing about this theft not to use the word confiscate except when quoting the activists/thugs. Here's Dictionary.com's definition of confiscate:
to seize as forfeited to the public domain; appropriate, by way of penalty, for public use.
Here's their definition for theft:
the act of stealing; the wrongful taking and carrying away of the personal goods or property of another; larceny.
This was an act of theft, not confiscation. These activists/thugs/thiefs should be punished for stealing other people's property. In this article , the community organizer/thief, Anna Shireman-Grabowski, offers a non-apology apology:
Today I, along with a group of non-Middlebury students, helped remove around 3,000 American flags from the grass by Mead Chapel. While I was not the only one engaged in this action and the decision was not solely mine, I am the one who will see you in the dining halls and in the classroom, and I want to take accountability for the hurt you may be feeling while clarifying the motivations for this action.
My intention was not to cause pain but to visibilize the necessity of honoring all human life and to help a friend heal from the violence of genocide that she carries with her on a daily basis as an indigenous person. While the American flags on the Middlebury hillside symbolize to some the loss of innocent lives in New York, to others they represent centuries of bloody conquest and mass murder. As a settler on stolen land, I do not have the luxury of grieving without an eye to power. Three thousand flags is a lot, but the campus is not big enough to hold a marker for every life sacrificed in the history of American conquest and colonialism.
TRANSLATION: I'm sorry for causing any pain to you colonialist pigs.
The first rule of holes is to stop digging. Apparently, Ms. Shireman-Grabowski didn't learn that lesson in Bill Ayers' PR class. Second, it's difficult to take this activist/thug/thief seriously when she 'admits' that she's a "settle on stolen land." She feels bad about it but not bad enough to stop attending the college. Perhaps Ms. Shireman-Grabowski needs to spend more time thinking things through and less time stealing private property. A lengthy jail term would provide her with that 'opportunity.'
Posted Monday, September 16, 2013 3:47 PM
No comments.
Open letter to Chancellor Rosenstone
To: Chancellor Steven Rosenstone
From: Gary Gross, citizen journalist
Subject: SCSU Crisis
Chancellor Rosenstone, I was optimistic when you were hired as the new chancellor of the MnSCU system. That optimism has faded as I gathered information about what was happening at MnSCU universities. Honestly, most of the information that's troubling me from a policy standpoint has come from St. Cloud State.
Historically speaking, St. Cloud State has been one of the premier universities in the MnSCU system. At this point, it's difficult to picture St. Cloud State as MnSCU's flagship university. I've documented President Potter's financial mismanagement in my writings.
According to St. Cloud State's Budget Committee, the University has lost $1.125 million per year the first 2 years Coborn's Plaza has been open. According to public documents, President Potter agreed to pay the City of St. Cloud $240,000 a year for 3 years. The 3 police officers' assignment is to investigate violent crimes committed near the St. Cloud State campus.
St. Cloud State can't afford that type of financial mismanagement when its enrollment is tanking. As you know, St. Cloud State's enrollment is down 8% as of 4:30am this morning. If St. Cloud State's enrollment is down that much this year, their enrollment will be down by approximately 18% over the past 3 years. That's a drop of approximately 3,000 students. It's also a significant drop in tuition revenues over that time.
Losing millions of dollars in tuition revenue each year isn't something the University can afford for a single year. In addition to this year's tuition revenue losses, St. Cloud State lost millions of dollars of tuition revenue the previous 2 years, too. When President Potter terminated Mahmoud Saffari, the Associate Vice President for Enrollment Management, Provost Malhotra said that the reason for terminating Dr. Saffari was that he hadn't produced a "satisfactory strategic enrollment management plan."
It's been 2 years since Dr. Saffari's termination and St. Cloud State still doesn't have a strategic enrollment management plan in place. In fact, there's proof that they haven't even started putting one together. That means that President Potter hasn't put a strategic enrollment management plan together even though St. Cloud State's enrollments have been dropping for three years.
Finally, professors from across the campus have reported student's transcripts getting doctored. President Potter's spokesman insists that this is because of late drops and withdrawals. Professors have stepped forward and said that their students' participation in their classes have disappeared entirely from their transcripts. There's no sugarcoating this fact: that's transcript fraud. The minute that a university's integrity is questioned, it's difficult to restore the public's trust.
Each of the categories I've described for you is a major strike against President Potter. He signed the agreement to pay the City of St. Cloud for police protection. President Potter also signed the agreement that's costing St. Cloud State $1,000,000+ a year.
During President Potter's time as president, enrollment has dropped dramatically. He said that putting a "satisfactory enrollment management plan" was imperative. Then he terminated the man he tasked with that assignment. Then President Potter didn't put together a satisfactory enrollment management plan. President Potter is the man responsible for delegating assignments. If they don't get done, he should shoulder the blame for not getting these assignments accomplished.
Thus far, there hasn't been proof that you've taken an interest in these issues. That can't continue. Indifference to a deteriorating situation isn't an option. It's imperative that you take these situations seriously. It's imperative that you launch a serious investigation into these matters.
A great university is getting damaged through President Potter's mismanagement. Now is the time for you, Chancellor Rosenstone, to step forward and provide the leadership needed to correct this situation and these mistakes.
Posted Monday, September 16, 2013 8:37 PM
No comments.
Buffett: Get rid of PPACA
When one of President Obama's trusted allies says the PPACA has to go , then it's a great sign that President Obama is in trouble. Warren Buffett, one of President Obama's most trusted allies, just made that statement:
"'We have a health system that, in terms of costs, is really out of control,' he added. 'And if you take this line and you project what has been happening into the future, we will get less and less competitive. So we need something else.'" Buffett insists that without changes to Obamacare average citizens will suffer.
"'What we have now is untenable over time,' said Buffett, an early supporter of President Obama. 'That kind of a cost compared to the rest of the world is really like a tapeworm eating, you know, at our economic body.'
That isn't the only criticism Buffett made during the interview:
Buffett does not believe that providing insurance for everyone is the first step to take in correcting our nation's healthcare system.
"'Attack the costs first, and then worry about expanding coverage,'" he said. "I would much rather see another plan that really attacks costs. And I think that's what the American public wants to see. I mean, the American public is not behind this bill.'"
Buffett is right. American families didn't insist on universal coverage. They clamored for lower health care costs. With the PPACA, they got what they didn't care about. With the PPACA, they didn't get what they pushed for.
Just like with other things, Washington didn't do what the American people wanted. The Democrats did what the party elders and their special interest allies wanted. This was the Rahm White House not letting "a good crisis go to waste." Democrats sold their soul for thirty pieces of silver because they weren't worried about fixing a problem. They worried about their ideology.
Now that they're left with a major mess to fix, their special interest allies, include Buffett and the AFL-CIO, are deserting them like rats fleeing a sinking ship.
The PPACA will die a horrific death. The only questions left are whether Democrats go along with its execution and how quickly it'll be replaced with a market-driven, patient-centered system. (Forget about European single-payer. Americans' trust in government is almost non-existent.)
Posted Tuesday, September 17, 2013 2:34 PM
Comment 1 by walter hanson at 17-Sep-13 03:35 PM
Gary:
Since it will only change when the President will sign something (the reason why a lot Democrats who pretend they are Republicans won't do anything) now we might get a reason for Obama to sign.
Of course the first three steps I will recommend to control costs:
One, sell across state lines.
Two, no mandates in the plan. Let you design the coverage.
And three, real tort reform to reduce the fear of doctors being sued and ordering lots of tests.
Will never happen because the Democrats don't like those thoughts.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
