According to the JS today, the Legislature has passed a budget that's headed to Gov. Doyle.
Noticed this:
http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/49163297.html
As an additional incentive for some Democrats to vote for the budget, about $9.6 million in regional favors were approved. ...
Those earmarks range from $3.33 million for Marquette University's new engineering school to ...
So MU is receiving $3.33m in "regional favors" a.k.a. pork.
Anyone have a problem with that?
And let's try to keep the conversation centered around .. Marquette.
This is offensive to all pigs. I don't think MU should accept the pork unless they restore the Warriors nickname.
Quote from: mu_hilltopper on June 27, 2009, 12:51:38 PM
And let's try to keep the conversation centered around .. Marquette.
I think that Marquette should refuse the money.
I'll leave my political beliefs supporting that statement out of this thread.
I'm surprised they asked and more surprised in this fiscal era it was approved.
Quote from: mu_hilltopper on June 27, 2009, 12:50:42 PM
According to the JS today, the Legislature has passed a budget that's headed to Gov. Doyle.
Noticed this:
http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/49163297.html
As an additional incentive for some Democrats to vote for the budget, about $9.6 million in regional favors were approved. ...
Those earmarks range from $3.33 million for Marquette University's new engineering school to ...
So MU is receiving $3.33m in "regional favors" a.k.a. pork.
Anyone have a problem with that?
There's no such thing as a free lunch, this all has to be paid for (in spades) down the road.
I've paid pretty close attention to the budget process .. what's odd is that they've had "earmark" lists before .. this earmark for MU is the first I've heard of it. Wasn't on the "list" as of 7-10 days ago.
In the end, I just don't see how the state gives money to MU for an engineering building. -- They also get $ for the Dentistry program, but that I understand. It's the only one in the state, plus it offers dental work for the poor, something the State would be interested in.
But an engineering building? Does not compute.
It's real easy for us to say "DON'T ACCEPT IT!!!" but they are being offered money to help them with a key University priority. They'd be dumb not to take it unless it has some strings attached.
will probably be used to attract new more freshman females of the swine variety.
Quote from: Skatastrophy on June 27, 2009, 03:29:24 PM
I think that Marquette should refuse the money.
I'll leave my political beliefs supporting that statement out of this thread.
+1
Turning down the money isn't going to solve the problem. It is likely that they actually lobbied for the money.
The area businesses need quality engineers and therefore probably lobbied to spend THEIR tax money on aiding Marquette build the new engineering building. Similar to the funding the dental school received from the state. Nuff said.
My worry is that the atheists will use any taxpayer earmarks allocated to the Engineering building to prevent Mass from being celebrated there, just as they've bleached the Dentistry building of any Catholic identity.
Good job, political party not to be named.
You think?
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on June 28, 2009, 08:45:50 AM
Turning down the money isn't going to solve the problem. It is likely that they actually lobbied for the money.
Well, the tone that people were using suggested that Marquette would be somehow surprised by this earmark.
Quote from: CAINMUTINY on June 28, 2009, 10:57:53 AM
The area businesses need quality engineers and therefore probably lobbied to spend THEIR tax money on aiding Marquette build the new engineering building. Similar to the funding the dental school received from the state. Nuff said.
Agreed.
Especially with the renovation of I94 between Milwaukee and Chicago in the works, engineers will be at a need for the area (a friend of mine is working on a project for a portion of that renovation around Racine as we speak, going through DOT and designing new on ramps, etc.).
Perhaps I am thinking Naively about it, that it wasn't just some old alumni that were like, "hell, lets get some over to out alma Mata."
But Milwaukee is in need of a face lift. Particularly with the old Breweries and industries that sit vacant. An increase in engineers with a mind on Milwaukee and it's inhabitants wouldn't be a bad thing to invigorate some life into those areas, whether it's environmental needs with proper stormwater runoffs or mechanical and a need to figure out electrical needs and Sewage needs. And perhaps the state figures to invest with MU since we are sitting at the heart of what needs to be helped.
But that could just be an idealistic thinking why the money is going to MU instead of people in severe need of relief.
Fair point that some are asking why MU would get this. If people think state governments are in the business of giving out millions of dollars to private institutions on their own without anyone asking for it, they have no business in this debate. Marquette is always asking for money. Often they get turned down for obvious reasons.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on June 30, 2009, 11:02:06 AM
Well, the tone that people were using suggested that Marquette would be somehow surprised by this earmark.
Quote from: pillardean on June 30, 2009, 12:18:45 PM
Agreed.
Especially with the renovation of I94 between Milwaukee and Chicago in the works, engineers will be at a need for the area (a friend of mine is working on a project for a portion of that renovation around Racine as we speak, going through DOT and designing new on ramps, etc.).
Perhaps I am thinking Naively about it, that it wasn't just some old alumni that were like, "hell, lets get some over to out alma Mata."
But Milwaukee is in need of a face lift. Particularly with the old Breweries and industries that sit vacant. An increase in engineers with a mind on Milwaukee and it's inhabitants wouldn't be a bad thing to invigorate some life into those areas, whether it's environmental needs with proper stormwater runoffs or mechanical and a need to figure out electrical needs and Sewage needs. And perhaps the state figures to invest with MU since we are sitting at the heart of what needs to be helped.
But that could just be an idealistic thinking why the money is going to MU instead of people in severe need of relief.
Milwaukee has three universities/colleges that offer engineering degrees. This new building IMO is not going to add much to the pool of engineers that don't already exist in the city.
Cosign +1000.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on June 30, 2009, 03:01:40 PM
Milwaukee has three universities/colleges that offer engineering degrees. This new building IMO is not going to add much to the pool of engineers that don't already exist in the city.
That's a good point, also, how long before these great new facilities really impact the engineering community in Milwaukee?
Let's say you build an AWESOME building (in the next 5 years) and MU is able to attract some more top engineering students.
Those students will take 4-5 years to graduate, and probably 2-3 years of experience before they really make a significant impact on civil projects around the city. (I'm assuming entry level engineering jobs is not where people make a big impact)
Now, I'm not saying MU shouldn't do it, or that it's a bad plan. I just think the impact might be more of a 10-20 year plan, not a 5-10 year plan.
This new building will probably not produce many (if any) people that will have any significant impact on any of the current civil engineering or redevelopment projects (roadways, Pabst redevelopment, etc.)
However, if you are looking at 15-20 years down the road, I think you could make that argument. Maybe these new engineering minds will solve mass transit problems in 2025. Who knows?
Quote from: 2002mualum on June 30, 2009, 03:26:57 PM
Now, I'm not saying MU shouldn't do it, or that it's a bad plan. I just think the impact might be more of a 10-20 year plan, not a 5-10 year plan.
This new building will probably not produce many (if any) people that will have any significant impact on any of the current civil engineering or redevelopment projects (roadways, Pabst redevelopment, etc.)
However, if you are looking at 15-20 years down the road, I think you could make that argument. Maybe these new engineering minds will solve mass transit problems in 2025. Who knows?
I agree that it won't be a significant help to the city within 10 years, maybe even 15 years. If you are considering only that far down the road than you are flawed.
What I was refering to were immediate developments as an example of Milwuakee redefining itself as a city to come to for large scale business. The old idea of Milwaukee does not fit into the modern social construct (although I wish it did-the hedonism of beer, food and fun only goes so far).
But within the new developments are oppurtunities for students to become associated with Milwaukee, become members of high end projects at entry level positions and witness what it takes in the profession. Too often young engineers do their externships out of Milwaukee and then sign on after that, out of Milwaukee.
Also, I just think it's a good thing for the school in any regards. Why not use it to develop a new quickline train (one of those in Japan and Germany) from Mil to Chi with a rail system throughout the city. Something completely plausible to think about in the upcoming years. Which would be a great asset to Milwaukee as a City and Wisconsin as State.
I just feel that alot of MU assets as students are too hasty to head back to Chicago after graduation-or some other destination. Why not infuse the school with a few extra dollars as a state/city to iniciate plans, ideas for the students to STAY within Milwaukee and the surrounding area. That would be an asset to any city.
But then again it is only 3.3 mil over two years with a bonus of another 1.66 in a third year. What can actually be accomplished with that nowaday's anyway.
I think its cute and all that you think that the State legislature put this much thought into the infrastructure needs of the Milwaukee area and have decided to support MU's engineering building as a logical result. Afterall, Wisconsin's state legislature has a long tradition of sound, far-sighted decision making.
However, MU lobbied for this, using multiple political connections, because it was an easy way to get some money that they would otherwise have to fundraise, finance, or charge to incoming students. Period.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on June 30, 2009, 03:01:40 PM
Milwaukee has three universities/colleges that offer engineering degrees. This new building IMO is not going to add much to the pool of engineers that don't already exist in the city.
Two California buddies went to Marquette just for their engineering program.
Neither of them applied to MSOE or UWM. So improving the Engineering Department helps recruiting, retention, and establishing/maintaining future engineering connections (political, educational, and business).
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on June 30, 2009, 04:54:15 PM
I think its cute and all that you think that the State legislature put this much thought into the infrastructure needs of the Milwaukee area and have decided to support MU's engineering building as a logical result. Afterall, Wisconsin's state legislature has a long tradition of sound, far-sighted decision making.
However, MU lobbied for this, using multiple political connections, because it was an easy way to get some money that they would otherwise have to fundraise, finance, or charge to incoming students. Period.
:) I need the optimism to survive.
Quote from: pillardean on June 30, 2009, 04:27:04 PM
What I was refering to were immediate developments as an example of Milwuakee redefining itself as a city to come to for large scale business. The old idea of Milwaukee does not fit into the modern social construct (although I wish it did-the hedonism of beer, food and fun only goes so far).
But that's an entirely different argument. If Wisconsin, California, New York and other states that are hemoraghing businesses right now want to lure more businesses, they need to create an environment that incentivizes them to do so. It's great that MU gets this money, though the piper will have to be paid by the taxpayers at some point....nothing is free in life. I just don't see businesses flocking to Milwaukee or Wisconsin for that matter until the environment to do so improves. Businesses flock to business friendly states and leave states that are not business friendly. Wisconsin finished in the bottom half for the Small Business friendly states study as well as the overall Business Friendly study down by the Tax Foundation.
If Wisconsin wants to lure businesses, more engineers, etc, they might want to improve the business climate. Lord knows we're seeing mass exodus here in California where we now rank 47th in one survey and 40th in the other. Jobs walking away like crazy. Very sad.
Quote from: 2002mualum on June 30, 2009, 03:26:57 PM
Now, I'm not saying MU shouldn't do it, or that it's a bad plan. I just think the impact might be more of a 10-20 year plan, not a 5-10 year plan.
By that time Milwaukee will just be suburb of Chicago.
Plus there are a ton of us recent engineering grads that still do not have jobs so I highly doubt local engineering firms lobbied for this at all.
What's sad is that we'll never know. The taxpayers will never have a clue as to who put that in the budget, and why.
.. I'm a new public official for a village, and have been learning the rules regarding open meetings .. it's really unbelievable the restrictions put on any sort of discussion between officials. We can't so much as talk privately about the candy we're throwing at the 4th of July Parade, let alone how we feel about budgetary items.
Meanwhile, the Wisconsin legislature (caucuses) are exempt from all the open meetings/records laws, enabling them to create budgets in total secrecy. Somebody behind closed doors demanded that $3.3m for MU be inserted into the budget.
We'll never know exactly why, or if (what) promises were exchanged.
It sure is nice to write the rules, then exempt yourself from them. >:(
Quote from: mu_hilltopper on June 30, 2009, 10:24:29 PM
What's sad is that we'll never know. The taxpayers will never have a clue as to who put that in the budget, and why.
.. I'm a new public official for a village, and have been learning the rules regarding open meetings .. it's really unbelievable the restrictions put on any sort of discussion between officials. We can't so much as talk privately about the candy we're throwing at the 4th of July Parade, let alone how we feel about budgetary items.
Meanwhile, the Wisconsin legislature (caucuses) are exempt from all the open meetings/records laws, enabling them to create budgets in total secrecy. Somebody behind closed doors demanded that $3.3m for MU be inserted into the budget.
We'll never know exactly why, or if (what) promises were exchanged.
It sure is nice to write the rules, then exempt yourself from them. >:(
You're exactly right. I've been solicited to serve a 2 year term in my city for one of the commissions. The rules are pretty incredible, very onerous. I'm used to open discussions, frank discussions with parties to negotiate deals, contracts, etc. The restraints that were put forth by some of these rules was a real turnoff.
Quote from: 77ncaachamps on June 30, 2009, 06:22:58 PM
Two California buddies went to Marquette just for their engineering program.
Neither of them applied to MSOE or UWM. So improving the Engineering Department helps recruiting, retention, and establishing/maintaining future engineering connections (political, educational, and business).
Are either of them living in Wisconsin now?
Quote from: tower912 on June 27, 2009, 05:13:39 PM
I'm surprised they asked and more surprised in this fiscal era it was approved.
Are you serious? Do you live in Wisconsin? This is the same fiscal era that has brought us the 'stimulus' package, GM, Chrysler...I'm surprised it wasn't $33 Million.
Quote from: muwarrior87 on June 30, 2009, 09:29:27 PM
Plus there are a ton of us recent engineering grads that still do not have jobs so I highly doubt local engineering firms lobbied for this at all.
Well, in the short run, it will create jobs to build the new building.
In the long run, it could potentially lead to more competition in the engineering job market.
Quote from: pillardean on June 30, 2009, 12:18:45 PM
Agreed.
Especially with the renovation of I94 between Milwaukee and Chicago in the works, engineers will be at a need for the area (a friend of mine is working on a project for a portion of that renovation around Racine as we speak, going through DOT and designing new on ramps, etc.).
Perhaps I am thinking Naively about it, that it wasn't just some old alumni that were like, "hell, lets get some over to out alma Mata."
But Milwaukee is in need of a face lift. Particularly with the old Breweries and industries that sit vacant. An increase in engineers with a mind on Milwaukee and it's inhabitants wouldn't be a bad thing to invigorate some life into those areas, whether it's environmental needs with proper stormwater runoffs or mechanical and a need to figure out electrical needs and Sewage needs. And perhaps the state figures to invest with MU since we are sitting at the heart of what needs to be helped.
But that could just be an idealistic thinking why the money is going to MU instead of people in severe need of relief.
Creative Writing? Did MR. Hayward teach that class?
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on July 01, 2009, 07:47:29 AM
Are either of them living in Wisconsin now?
Good point.
None do. One's married in the service (Marine Corps) so he has to move. The other moved to LA (to pursue acting which is kinda hard to do in Milwaukee).
Quote from: 77ncaachamps on July 02, 2009, 06:18:51 PM
Good point.
None do. One's married in the service (Marine Corps) so he has to move. The other moved to LA (to pursue acting which is kinda hard to do in Milwaukee).
That is why, if the goal is to get engineers to stay in Milwaukee, supporting UWM is probably smarter. But since that's not the reason they did this, who cares.
kind of an earmark paradox isn't it? A lot of people will come out and hate earmarks and pork spending (bridges to nowhere, "monuments to me") but when it's in your back yard or at your a school you're loyal to it's kind of nice to see that money coming this way isn't it?
I'd much rather have the money come at a time when the state of Wisconsin isn't $6b in debt.
Quote from: Ari Gold on July 09, 2009, 02:25:05 PM
but when it's in your back yard or at your a school you're loyal to it's kind of nice to see that money coming this way isn't it?
Yeah... really nice of them to give my money away to my university. I'm glad that they know how to spend my money better than I do.
Quote from: Skatastrophy on July 09, 2009, 02:57:41 PM
Yeah... really nice of them to give my money away to my university. I'm glad that they know how to spend my money better than I do.
Oh gah of all people... I'm not the one implying that for a second I hate pork spending and taxes. Politics aside Marquette getting some sweet sweet government fatty cash is better than it going to the state schools
Quote from: Ari Gold on July 09, 2009, 04:19:24 PM
Oh gah of all people... I'm not the one implying that for a second I hate pork spending and taxes. Politics aside Marquette getting some sweet sweet government fatty cash is better than it going to the state schools
Why? State funded higher education is by definition the responsibility of state government. At least if the money went to a state school it would be consistent with what the government ought to fund.
Should Wisconsin then give each eligible voter in Wisconsin $1 each?
Quote from: 77ncaachamps on July 10, 2009, 02:08:10 PM
Should Wisconsin then give each eligible voter in Wisconsin $1 each?
No. I don't necessarily mind that MU is getting money from the State. I do have a problem with the comment that giving MU the money is "better than giving it to the state schools." State schools should be funded by state money - if the Legislature took $3.3 million from UW-Eau Claire and gave it to MU, that wouldn't be appropriate.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on July 09, 2009, 08:29:46 PM
Why? State funded higher education is by definition the responsibility of state government. At least if the money went to a state school it would be consistent with what the government ought to fund.
the government OUGHT fund roads and police/military. It's choice to fund MPS, WEAC and the UW system is proof that the government is terrible at it's job. at what point did you think that me referring to "school funding" as "sweet sweet government fatty cash" made me take this seriously, or care about where MU is getting money from. Sure I'd rather receive private funding but...
"if the Legislature took $3.3 million from UW-Eau Claire and gave it to MU, that wouldn't be appropriate."
How does that change the situation? I fail to see the point. Most governments don't understand what money is to begin with, most of the time money is considered fake...a few billion allocated here, 10% increases here... . There is no reducing government spending period.
Quote from: Ari Gold on July 10, 2009, 03:58:38 PM
the government OUGHT fund roads and police/military. It's choice to fund MPS, WEAC and the UW system is proof that the government is terrible at it's job.
I'm really not sure what you are driving at here. The government doesn't fund WEAC, and the way it funds public schools is much different than how they fund the UW System. Essentially, the State gives the UW System money in return for charging lower tuition.
And I don't know why you feel that this is evidence that it is terrible at it's job. The UW System is where the vast majority of Wisconsin residents that have college degrees have earned their education...that is the same nationwide with all public universities. It can be argued that the emergence of public higher education over the last century is one of the engines that has driven our country's success over that time.