IDS 1: The Promoting Fairness and Equality in Education Act (Debating)

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

     I would assent to abolishing sports scholarships, on the proviso that the prohibition were only on the use of public funds for that purpose. If some wealthy alum wants to endow an athletic scholarship, that's up to them. But I don't think taxpayers should have to support it.

I'd be fine with that compromise.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

I won't vote for anything that eliminates athletic scholarships or hinders them in any way. I maintain they are net positives for the lives of college athletes, and taking away opportunities to go to college for millions of kids each year isn't something I can be supportive of.

If we want to talk increased oversight of athletic programs aside from the NCAA, I'm fine with that, but not putting limitations on what state universities can give scholarships to.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     When you say increased oversight, what do you have in mind?

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

I don't have anything in mind because I don't know how to fix college athletics. No one seeks to know what to do. But banning athletic scholarships isn't the way to go. You'd just be letting a few bad eggs spoil opportunities for millions of kids to get the opportunity to go to college.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

Another point I want to make is if we make this law and defund scholarships for athletics, students will just go to other schools in other regions and we can watch enrollment in our schools decline and the educated population leave.

This would be bad for all of us in this region. A lot of people don't just chose colleges for what they want to study. They chose them for the extracurriculars.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Another point I want to make is if we make this law and defund scholarships for athletics, students will just go to other schools in other regions and we can watch enrollment in our schools decline and the educated population leave.

This would be bad for all of us in this region. A lot of people don't just chose colleges for what they want to study. They chose them for the extracurriculars.

Colleges should first and foremost be academic institutions, not athletic institutions.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

Another point I want to make is if we make this law and defund scholarships for athletics, students will just go to other schools in other regions and we can watch enrollment in our schools decline and the educated population leave.

This would be bad for all of us in this region. A lot of people don't just chose colleges for what they want to study. They chose them for the extracurriculars.

Colleges should first and foremost be academic institutions, not athletic institutions.

I had this argument with my grandfather the other day...

Anyway, while in an ideal world that is true, that's not the case. People chose colleges for all kinds of reasons - party scene, sports, location, class size. Some people do pick them because they're academics are great, but not everyone. College is just as much about the social aspect as it is academics. You go there to learn, but you also go to make friends, memories, and feel like you're part of something.

If we do what you want to do, enrollment will drop at our schools, they will have less money for research, and revenues will decline. I want the South to have the best colleges with the best experiences, not boring places were you just go to class and go back to your dorm to sit idly while studying. We're sure to attract less of the cream of the crop.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     I was going to say that nobody I know chooses based on the sports team...except it occurs to me that in the South they probably do. College sports is much more important in this region than it is in the Bay Area where I live IRL. You're right, Duke; reducing funding for athletics would probably have a very negative impact on the region's schools.

     With that said, how about this? Our schools reach out to a group of their wealthiest alumni to endow athletic scholarships, and for each one that does we reduce our support by a commensurate amount. Considering how conservative our region is, I think there'd be some real interest in "buying out" government support of the universities here. College athletics would continue to be funded and we would be able to withdraw funds to budget towards emergencies, other initiatives, or refund to the taxpayers.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

     I was going to say that nobody I know chooses based on the sports team...except it occurs to me that in the South they probably do. College sports is much more important in this region than it is in the Bay Area where I live IRL. You're right, Duke; reducing funding for athletics would probably have a very negative impact on the region's schools.

     With that said, how about this? Our schools reach out to a group of their wealthiest alumni to endow athletic scholarships, and for each one that does we reduce our support by a commensurate amount. Considering how conservative our region is, I think there'd be some real interest in "buying out" government support of the universities here. College athletics would continue to be funded and we would be able to withdraw funds to budget towards emergencies, other initiatives, or refund to the taxpayers.

But then wouldn't you be essentially redistributing funding from academics to athletics?

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

PiT, your idea could work, but i also worry it may just have no teeth to it. What incentive do wealthy donors have to donate? Many already do, but for things like facilities and food courts to make the offerings better for students. We can pass something like you propose though since it wont change anything if schools decide not to use it. I would support your propsal.

And I know i am right about chosing schools based on athletics here. I know plenty of people that chose schools because they wanted big time athletic programs to participate and attend the events. It is very big in our region especially. If we ignore that, we are going to hurt ourselves immensely.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     The critical thing to note is that athletics attracts greater philanthropy. Average gifts are higher, including from donors who also support academics. This is something I know about through my work. It might take some money from academic causes, but much less than it would add to athletics.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

I can support something like that, PiT, I just hope it doesn't have adverse effects on academic scholarships.

the way I understand it is, if a booster donates X amount towards scholarships, the government will reduce their funding by that amount? Is this decided on a year by year basis?

[Associate Justice PiT]

     They would probably have to specifically assent to it, or else the universities would lose out on lots of donations from people who would see it as pointless.

     For the purposes of our budgeting it should be yearly, based on the gift date. That's how the university will be tracking it.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Bump

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Anyway, I just read over the bill. I think an important question to ask is whether this is a good goal to be forcing more lower-income students into college under the current system. They are especially vulnerable to the effects of endemic underemployment that face recent grads, and more likely to end up "losers" in the employment game anyway given that many of the best positions are doled out through nepotistic means.

     Also by expanding enrollment of lower-income students, universities may find themselves putting together inferior financial aid packages that include more loans. This is true of both private universities, where tuition is quite expensive, and public universities, where endowments tend to be quite modest. The end result is higher debtloads that can have a ruinous effect on recent graduates from low-income backgrounds. The very people that we are seeking to help.

     This is my suggestion to help out: make college more affordable. We have the power to freeze tuition of our region's public universities, and to do so at whatever level is reasonable for us. This effect would also force all but the most elite private universities to lower their own tuitions as well in order to remain competitive. The exploding cost of college is a buzzsaw ruining our youths and damaging our region's economy. This is an issue that has to be dealt with, or else sending more people from low-income backgrounds to college will just mean ruining more lives.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

It should also be noted that constantly masking the effects of rising costs with further subsidization will only incure more tuition inflation. There is no incentive to cut administrative excess and waste in that system for instance and the biggest area of growth has not been in teachers but support staff who spend no time at all in an actualy classroom or with a student.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

PiT is right. I am just too afraid to mess with the current system to encourage even more low income students to take on debt. And of course, I won't ever support doing away with or limiting athletic scholarships because they do provide many inner city and lower income students a chance to go to college without having to take on debt, and this is something that seems to be overlooked by many here, especially those who don't  go to schools with major athletic programs.

But never fear, I have been elected to speak on their behalf.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     I tried to keep sections I liked. Otherwise this is pretty much a new bill, but here are my ideas:

1. Starting with the 2015-16 academic year, tuition at public universities in the region shall be set to what it was at each university in the 2006-07 academic year.
     a. Tuition shall not increase for a period of five years, nor may it increase by more than 10% from year to year after that time has elapsed, unless otherwise provided for by the Southern Legislator, or by executive order of the Governor.
     b. The regional Department of Education shall commission a report on how best to cut spending at regional universities. The report shall be due by the end of August.

2. A regional commission shall be established to investigate the best methods for increasing the accountability of charter schools and penalizing those that fail to provide their students with a quality education.  The Southern Commission on Charter Schools shall report is findings in September. 

3. Public colleges and universities shall take no further steps toward race-based affirmative action than the absolute minimum required by federal law.

4. Should any private citizen making a gift to an athletic scholarship or endowment thereof choose to do so, that person's gift may be deducted from the regional budget's allotment for athletic scholarships.
     a. In the case of a gift to a scholarship, the deduction will apply only for that budget year. In the case of a gift to an endowment, the deduction will be permanent.
     b. Any university gift officer corresponding with the donor in the process of stewarding the gift prior to issuance of the gift or pledge payment shall be required to inform the donor of this option.

5. At public universities in the region, as well as any private universities that receive public funding from the region through student financial aid, all staff and faculty shall be required to forward any reports of criminal activities by students to local or regional law enforcement.
     a. Failure to report shall be a misdemeanor, carrying a penalty of six months to one year in prison. If said staff or faculty member is employed by a public university, then they will also be subject to disciplinary hearings, up to and including the possibility of termination.
     b. Any staff or faculty member found noncompliant with this provision may also be charged as an accessory to the crime of which the student has been accused.
     c. Such universities shall be denied the power to discipline students for criminal activities, in absence of a finding of guilt or a pleading of guilt or no contest in a trial by jury or judge.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     In light of a Senate bill currently being debated, I am adding a relevant section to this proposal. It is related enough and especially considering that this is already a hodge-podge of different ideas. Also, I hope to see some debate in here when I check this tomorrow....

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

That looks fine.

I think we all know how to best cut spending at these schools, but it would involve having a discussion no one wants to have given how it is political suicide to discuss it.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

I object to Speaker PiT's amendment.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Indeed. I am open to making it effective 2016-17 to give schools time to make a plan and thought at length about it. I went with 2015-16 partially because I am hoping to create a situation where schools have to make tough decisions and cut more than just meaningless fluff. There are things like faculty salaries that are, barring financial exigency, essentially untouchable.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

That looks fine.

I think we all know how to best cut spending at these schools, but it would involve having a discussion no one wants to have given how it is political suicide to discuss it.

But paying coaches millions and millions of dollars isn't wasteful spending, right?

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Making it so I don't get notifications for new posts when I post is convenient for fast-paced threads, but man does it make it easy to miss them. Noting Legislator X's objection to the amended bill, a vote will now be open on the amendment.

     Aye

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

That looks fine.

I think we all know how to best cut spending at these schools, but it would involve having a discussion no one wants to have given how it is political suicide to discuss it.

But paying coaches millions and millions of dollars isn't wasteful spending, right?

Coaches pay isn't the root of the problem. And most of the salary comes from ticket sales, boosters, and the like, not tuition.

This witchhunt against college athletics must stop. Especially in the south of all places, where sports play a huge role in the college experience. I am not going to be the one that hurts enrollment and interest in our schools. As a lifelong southerner, I know how important sports are in attracting students.

I vote aye on the amendment.