University of Wisconsin Oshkosh - Quiver Yearbook (Oshkosh, WI)

Page 28 text:

PRO PRO PRO by bill schlamer Believe it on not, this is the Pro-Con column; the column that gives knowledgeable people the opportunity to rationally debate current controversial issues. The column that asks a question and gives a proponent a 1,000 word whack at it, gives the same chance to an opponent, and then has the opposing sides exchange statements for 1,000 word rebuttals. Statements and rebuttals appear side by side. No words barred. Well, almost no words are barred. That's the way the column has worked in the oast. That’s the way we planned it for this issue’s dabate: Should the proposed student user’s fee be adopted? It didn’t turn out as planned. You see, .here’s this new guy on the job, and the thing became kind of an exercise in futility. friday august 31 To make a long story longer, it all started when I was handed one of those silly little scratch pad notes captioned, Notes from an Italian Lover,’’ and Biobanana’d on the note was the editor’s message, “For Pro-Con, check student government ior someone pro-user fee (probably someone from the allocations committee). Dean Smith probably for con. That’s when I got on the user fee merry-go-round, guenther “Sounds like pretty heavy stuff, commented Gerry Guenther, Oshkosh Student Association (OSA) vice president, as I explained the format of the column and the question to be debated, but I don’t know where you’re going to find someone on campus who is pro-user fee, he added. Guenther said he was certain OSA President Gwen Kelly would be willing to give The Last Quiver a statement opposing the plan, but he also suggested that the ideal debate would be between two Madison user fee antagonists, Randy Nilsestuen, United Council president, and Donald Percy, UW system vice president of budget, planning and analysis. Good idea, I agreed, but I think we’d have more student interest if the comments were from students, faculty, or administrators here on campus. I told Guenther not to go ahead with an OSA statement until I located a proponent of the user fee plan. johnson-edson Recalling that Gerald Johnson, UW-0 budget analyst, had made some comments about the user fee earlier in the year, I dropped in at his Dempsey Hall office to ask whether he knew of anyone in administration who favored the plan. I don’t think you’re going to find anyone in Dempsey who is pro-user fee, he predicted. Johnson criticized the plan's vague phrasing, especially the term, non-instructional activity.’ What is non-instructional activity?” he wondered. Johnson offered to ask Joel Edson of the Administrative Affairs office whether he knew a campus use fee advocate. After a few minutes, Johnson returned from Edson’s office and said that Edson had told him guidelines from UW’s Central Administration were expected the following week, and that an official university position might be released then. According to Jonnson, Edson had called the current user fee proposal, a philosophy, not a definitive plan. Tne attitude of the administration toward the philosophy, Edson said, could be described as hostile. tuesday September 4 goff Working on the hunch that the user fee might have come up in class or faculty discussions in the political science department, I contacted Dr. Charles Goff, who is teaching Wisconsin Government and Politics this semester. I told Goff, “I’m looking for someone rather uniaue; someone who is a supporter of the proposed student use fee.” Goff said the user fee had not been discussed at great length among political science faculty members. He thought tne plan would sound the death knell for intercollegiate athletics on the smaller UW-system campuses. He suggested that Eric Kitzman, director of intercollegiate athletics, CON CON CON 24

Page 27 text:

by kris norgard - c -, y ? H?r j5P2» GrwV,061 775 7 . Uh ter ' ° b ££ cSf?5ffS 4gft, Vs Vs - gi'H M y ckJ ctlon. SKSrfiSfr '■• “ m iou yfk kV EI m •« ., —. -, - -S3 E® » 5e c. !fem arm er e Z 2 M 5 e AP Ss 5 £' «t - This being my first year away from Madison I am homesick for the fun and general hell-raising like dope smoke-ins, taking over State Street for a pedestrian mall, and protesting imperialist U.S. actions in Indo-China. Tear gas, police brutality, and street action are now only fond memories. So naturally, paging through old Advance-Titans I was drawn to headlines like Campus Coalition Fights Cuts, Faculty Unites to Protect Rights, “Faculty Defies Administration, et cetera. It seems that last spring, the controversy was close to home. UW-0 had the budget cut, and faculty, tenured and non-tenured, were fired to cut costs. Hasty action by WEACT (not an acronym but a declaration of intent) and a Student-Faculty Coalition resulted in some reconsideration of where the budget should be cut. Chancellor Guiles was in the hot seat. Franklin Utech, chairman of the Art Department and President of WEACT headed the actions taken. Utech is not a wild-eyed radical. He is very easy to talk to and is idealistic about the whole philosophy of higher education. Professor Utech sees the necessity of faculty unionization and collective bargaining. You can’t let the administration have the faculty over the barrel, that certainly isn’t academic freedom. Every time you have to economize, knock a teacher or researcher off the payroll, maybe even close a department, tnai certainly will not enhance the academic quality oi UW-O. But a unionized faculty might strike! All my tuition down the drain. I went to hear Don Krahn, Director of Field Services for WEA-NEA speak about collective bargaining on September 12. Collective bargaining is going to oe a reality. You can’t hide your head in the sand like an ostrich, it isn’t going away. Three bills have been introduced in the State Legislature. Don Krahn quietly but emphatically pointed out that WEA-NEA is a powerful organization with resources to fight the public school teachers battles in the courts and in the Legislature. If we don’t join their union, we can have a hassle getting a decent cut of the State budget for education. If we’re not with them, we’re against them. Professional pride is keeping faculty from unionizing. Labor unionizes for pay, professors will have to unionize to have a voice in governance and in priorities in the budget. B 23

Page 29 text:

r PRO PRO PR or Joseph Piper, UW-0 mathematics instructor and a member of the Titan Booster Club, might know someone who had endorsed the plan. Wednesday September 5 On my sixth trip up the three flights of Polk Library stairs to Dr. Piper’s office, someone came out of one of the adjoining offices and said Dr. Piper would not be in, “because his wife is having an operation, or something. I crossed Piper’s name off my list. willis Intercollegiate athletics was next on my list. I asked Herb Willis, UW-0 sports information director, who the department’s opponents were in the user fee bowl. “I don't know who’s for that plan,” Willis said. All I know is that if it is adopted, it will mean my job. Willis remarked that UW Central Administration at Madison had received so much pressure from Wisconsin State University Conference coaches and athletic directors that, “the administration finally told us to stay out of politics.” He accused the administration of sitting on its hands, and said without statewide athletic department pressure, the user fee might be in effect now rather than just in the discussion stage. A check of back-copies of the Advance-Titan convinced me that I would not find a user fee advocate on campus. Assistant Chancellor William White, former 6SA president Mark Mitchell, Dean of Students, Edwin Smith, Gerald Johnson, Eric Kitzman, and the current OSA officials all opposed the plan. There were no favorable comments. In fact, the nearest thing favorable was Gov. Lucey’s original recommendation that, ...the university should study all non-instructional activities with the intent of placing a user’s fee on these activities. I told Editor Ted Conrardy that I had been stymied in my search for a user fee proponent, and suggested Gerry Guenther’s Madison debate might be our best bet. Go ahead, Ted agreed. Keep track of your phone calls. Gerry Guenther was contacted and told we were going off-campus for statements as he had suggested, and we would no longer need a contribution concerning user fees from the OSA. nilsestuen Randy Nilsestuen, United Council president, quickly agreed to the terms of the column, but reported the Guenther’s proponent recommendation, Donald Percy, actually disapproved of the plan too. Percy might be willing to present the pro side of the issue, Nilsestuen said, but he thought Richard Dunn of the State Department of Administration’s Education Division, and Duane Schultz or Jim Wood of the governor’s office would be better prospects. I gave Nilsestuen deadline dates, and told nim I would let him know later who his opponent would be. Nilsestuen’s first choice, Richard Dunn, was out of town. governor s office I had no trouble getting to Duane Schultz, and he listened politely as I explained the format of the column. Schultz advised that he would have to consult with senior members of the governor’s staff, but would call back before 8:15 the following morning. friday September 7 governor's office again Two days and two probing telephone calls later, I finally got through to Schultz. His answer was disappointing. “Fve talked it over with our senior staff members, he explained, “and they have decided not to participate.” nilsestuen again It was now 10 days to deadline; not enough time to allow an exchange of statements between Madison debaters. I decided to call Nilsestuen to let him know the debate was off but the The Last Quiver was still interested in his 1,000 word • CON CON CON ( 25