Respectfully submitted by Lawrence E. Rafferty (rafflaw) Weekend Contributor
I have to give Governor Bruce Rauner credit for not taking long to show his hand and publicly attack the Higher Education system in Illinois. It has only been a few weeks since he was inaugurated and he recently unveiled his budget. A budget plan that slashes over $200 million just from the University of Illinois alone.
At the very time Gov. Rauner announced he wants to slash the Higher Education budget for all universities in the State of Illinois by almost a third, he claimed that his budget makes education a priority!
“Higher education is set to take a major hit in Illinois.
Following similar announcements by the Republican governors of Wisconsin and Louisiana, newly-sworn in Illinois Governor Bruce Rauner released what he called a “turnaround” budget, that would slash nearly $209 million from the University of Illinois.” Think Progress
“It’s time to make education our top priority again – and that’s what this budget does,” he told lawmakers Tuesday night, touting his plan to give about $25 million more to early childhood education. “With reform, we will be able to invest more in education and give our kids world class schools.” Think Progress
While the proposed budget increases some funding for K-12 education, the University of Illinois system will lose one-third of its state financing under this budget. This very same proposed budget makes absolutely no mention of any increased revenue sources or plans. What will happen to the University system if these cuts are retained in the final budget?
One can expect the cuts to cause increased fees being charged to students as well as the loss of many educational programs. The result of these massive reductions in state financing will be to transfer the costs to students who are already paying high tuition and fee costs. The loan balances of many students already into the 6 figures and Gov. Rauner’s actions will make sure that student debt will continue to climb in Illinois.
So often the claims that all areas of the State have to share in the burden of digging out of a financial hole ends up with some of the most vulnerable bearing the brunt of that burden. If the Governor is convinced that we all have to sacrifice in this job to balance the budget, why wouldn’t new tax sources be considered along with reasonable cuts?
Will these draconian cuts make it more difficult for students from poor and middle class families to obtain a college education? In this very same budget proposal, Gov. Rauner biggest cuts are aimed directly at those who are least able to afford them.
“Yet the state would spend $400 million less on higher education, $600 million less on local governments, and $1.5 billion less on Medicaid, which handles health care costs for poor residents. University leaders and mayors said they were worried, and advocates for the poor said they feared medical needs would go unmet under deep cuts to Medicaid.” New York Times
When the cities, counties and municipalities raise their taxes to pay for basic services for their residents, who has to pay for those increases? “In many cases, Rauner’s state budget cuts could simply end up shifting costs: local governments could choose to raise property taxes, state universities could raise tuition and the CTA could increase fares.” Chicago Tribune
For a man who spent at least $37 million of his own money to get elected governor, he sure has no problem making the middle class and poor pay more for a college education and for health care and local taxes and transportation costs.
Rauner seems to be following the economic model that worked so “well” for Gov. Brownback in Kansas and Gov. Walker in Wisconsin.
Just how has that austerity approach worked out for Kansas and Wisconsin?
Additional Sources: Examiner.com; Crains Chicago Business
“The views expressed in this posting are the author’s alone and not those of the blog, the host, or other bloggers. As an open forum, weekend bloggers post independently without pre-approval or review. Content and any displays or art are solely their decision and responsibility.”
wade:
You missed the funny part: “Some states require it as part of their state constitution, Wisconsin is not one of them.” Which states?
Land grant colleges are schools designated by state legislature to receive benefits from the federal Morrill Acts. These benefits were designed to teach farmers and soldiers special skills to aid their work. Some like Cornell are private others like Penn State are public schools. I am aware of no state constitutional provision requiring state designated land grant colleges to accept every student who has graduated from that state’s high school system and who applies. And by the way neither is anyone else.
Please disregard the word “during”. My Wisconsin fingers are frozen and I mistyped.
Oh for god’s sake! It is no big deal to not pass the bar the first time around.
Cardoza flunked the bar. FDR flunked the bar. Pete Wilson flunked the bar.
It has great importance to those with small minds who also find the size of women’s ankles and hips of great importance.
While my daughter DID during take the Wisconsin bar because she was a graduate of Florida State law school, she is friends and colleagues with many Wisconsin lawyers who didn’t take the bar and she reports that they are more than competant and if they weren’t they wouldn’t last long in most private practice or even the State or Federal agencies. I believe the “concern” about Wisconsin lawyers is misplaced and is just another way to bash a state, it’s residents, it’s institutions and it’s professionals.
Nick,
Why is the diploma privilege a concern to you, a non-attorney? Do you have evidence that U of W and Marquette law school graduates are unfit to practice law in Wisconsin because they do not take a Bar exam? If law firms in Wisconsin were complaining about under educated law graduates, I am sure the Supreme Court of Wisconsin would listen.
raff, I was imprecise in my writing. I meant the crazy part of this thread today. As long as you’re here, what are your thoughts on Wisconsin’s diploma privilege? The record shows, I have blasted this archaic system here in the past, and on 2 other legal blogs previously. Indeed, it is a pet peeve of mine. Et vous?
Nick,
If Professor Turley wants to delete some individual postings, that is his right as owner, but there is no need to delete the thread just because you want it deleted.
DBQ, When you sit down and have a couple drinks w/ GOOD Wi. attorneys, they same the same thing. They know the bar is more than just a right of passage. It is a good, not perfect, but good way to test the competency of attorneys. But, the provincial Wi. Bar and 2 law schools like the good ol’ days. And, to date, they have been able to keep a bad policy in place. Like I said, Ca. was on of the first states that had diploma privilege to do away w/ it almost 100 years ago. Guv Moonbeam flunked the bar. Just sayn’.
A lobotomy is the only thing that will help this guy.
What’s YOUR opinion on diploma privilege?
I would want to know that the attorney that I was considering hiring had passed a bar exam and wasn’t just riding on the mere acquisition of a diploma. Just obtaining a diploma is in NO way a guarantee that the person is competent in their profession or that they even really have knowledge of their subject.
I’ve seen many people and especially teachers who have diplomas but are so incredibly under educated not only in their own subject but in many other topics.
I had to pass a rigorous and very difficult test to obtain my securities license (Series 7) and to be a CFP the test is even harder. We also are required to have continuing education to keep up with changing rules and maintain our competency. Would YOU trust your money and future to someone who never passed a competency test and just hung out a shingle saying they were a financial expert? I wouldn’t
If you haven’t passed a test for the bar to prove your knowledge. I don’t want you.
Wow!! Just, wow. JT needs to just delete this thread. I apologize for engaging the insanity.
What’s YOUR opinion on diploma privilege?
The discussion wasn’t even about diploma privilege until Spinelli brought it up in an attempt at discrediting my daughter who he thought graduated from the UW Law School. THAT is how and why it was introduced into this thread. We were discussing college rankings.
Any other information on diploma privilege?
Res Ipsa Loquitor is a blog! I guess nick thinks Jonathan only writes about things in which he has a vested interest. No good information here–only spin. Move along.
http://activerain.trulia.com/image_store/uploads/4/2/0/0/9/ar127845607190024.jpg
I drink good bourbon, but in moderation. I don’t sip into the wee hours writing comments w/ increasingly bad grammar as the clock turns past midnight. I always try and retire w/ my wife @ a reasonable hour.
Paul is owed credit for his mention of the Morill Act(s). Indeed, they are responsible for the great growth of universities in the US. They were responsible for allowing the ordinary citizen an opportunity for higher education.
They were a LIBERAL idea.
They were created by the US GOVERNMENT.
The Act provided millions of citizens a higher education and all that comes with an educated citizenry.
Many readers here need to be reminded of what government can accomplish.
Given Common Core I am not sure what constitutes teacher malpractice.
Paul said:
“Wadewilliams – I will walk that back. Some states require it as part of their state constitution, Wisconsin is not one of them. However, according the the Wisconsin constitution there are no requirement for entrance to the college.”
Some walk back!
As ever, you are still mistaken. Please name one state that is required to take to take every high school graduate from their state. Yours is a laughable assertion.