Last week, I posted about the funding decisions made by the University of Minnesota - Twin Cities regarding the division of student fees. UMTC defunded the most active conservative groups on campus while increasing funding for politically active groups with liberal political agendas. Bill Gilles reports that the second round of recommendations has come through the Student Activities Office, and that the results have changed the picture somewhat -- it's actually gotten worse. CFACT and SFV still have received an unprecedented defunding by UMTC, and now the allocations that were to go to the Minnesota Republic, a newspaper with a conservative outlook, and the Conservative Club have been cut by almost 30% from the initial funding announcement.

The Minnesota Daily, which Gilles lists as a liberal newspaper, reports on the process without ever mentioning the cessation of funding for conservative voices:

While the Student Organizations Committee recommended funding more than 80 percent of the requests, several organizations will take a considerable hit in funding come fall semester if the committee’s recommendations are adhered to.

Ten organizations were recommended to receive at least 30 percent less money than requested.

Under the committee’s initial recommendations, three organizations would receive no money for 2006-2007. Eight organizations would receive full funding.

Three organizations will receive no funding, but the Daily never mentions their names. Two of them are CFACT and Students for Family Values (SFV), and the list of recommendations for 2006-7 only lists the Student Emergency Loan fund as a group requesting funding to fail to garner any monies at all -- and they weren't funded in the last term, either.

The Daily does note that one of the conservative groups attended the open hearing to protest the reduction of his group's request:

While the committee’s deliberations are open to the public, few representatives from fees-requesting student groups attended.

But when Aaron Solem arrived to find his organization’s request had already been considered and wasn’t allowed to address any questions, he wasn’t too happy.

Solem’s organization, Students for a Conservative Voice, would be funded about $13,000 to $17,000 less than requested under the initial recommendations.

Solem, who has served on the committee, berated members when they refused to reconsider his organization’s request.

“To address discrepancies, groups are allowed to speak,” he said. “We were not allowed to speak.”

That reduction accounts for a 40% loss in funding for the MN Republic, which SCV produces.

Last week, some commenters left excellent remarks concerning this story. First, some questioned the inclusion of groups such as the various ethnic communities requesting funding as "liberal" -- a good question. Reviewing their applications, at least some of them acknowledged political activities as part of their "outreach", but the Asian and Native Americans did not explicitly do so. Others protested the inclusion of the Daily as a liberal group, since it is the official student newspaper on campus. Even if one strikes those out, it still amounts to a 6-1 funding gap for last year, and that expands to a 16-1 gap for the next year based on current recommendations:

Liberal Groups........................This Year...........Initial Outlay..............Updated Outlay
Muslims.................................$58,000.00...........$55,900.00.................$55,900.00
Africans................................$10,000.00...........$20,000.00.................$14,138.00
Black Student Union..............$53,900.00...........$49,300.00.................$49,300.00
Atheists...................................$8,500.00.............$6,000.00...................$6,000.00
Alternative Theatre.........................$0.00..........$15,000.00..................$10,000.00
Disabled.................................$28,000.00..........$28,000.00..................$23,000.00
La Raza.................................$36,400.00..........$42,600.00..................$39,600.00
International Students............$59,000.00..........$42,700.00..................$42,100.00
MPIRG....................................$78,181.00..........$76,880.00..................$76,880.00
Queers..................................$29,000.00..........$37,000.00..................$37,000.00
Voice.......................................$5,000.00............$7,000.00....................$5,000.00
The Wake (liberal paper).......$91,000.00........$100,000.00................$100,000.00
Women's Collective...............$25,000.00..........$28,500.00..................$28,500.00

Liberal Totals.......................$481,981.00........$508,880.00................$487,418.00

Conservative Groups
Family Values..........................$5,000.00...................$0.00............................$0.00
CFACT...................................$85,000.00...................$0.00............................$0.00
MN Republic (paper).......................$0.00..........$24,000.00...................$17,800.00
Conservative Club..........................$0.00...........$15,000.00..................$12,800.00

Conservative Totals...............$85,000.00..........$39,000.00...................$30,600.00

Another series of comments talked about the essential dichotomy of a conservative group complaining about a lack of government subsidy. This to me seemed a very good point. (Note: read the update below for more information on this point.) Instead of arguing for the restoration of the money from what is essentially a tax, perhaps CFACT would be better off by demanding an end to the student fees altogether and require these groups to get direct student donations for their survival instead. Gilles addresses this point in a separate message to CQ readers:

Not all conservatives believe we should apply for funding. They believe the system is bad and we should not participate. We think this is foolish and allows liberals an uncontested pot of $1 million on every campus of note. We disagree with that sentiment, but respect those conservative groups who choose to sit out the fees fight on ideological grounds.

That's also a fair point, but CFACT might do well to apply for the funding as long as the system exists while still arguing for the elimination of the fees.

I'll be talking with Bill later tonight and will podcast the interview afterwards.

UPDATE: I spoke with Bill Gilles earlier tonight and asked him some of the questions CQ readers have posed here. Take a listen to the entire interview via the CQ Podcast (note the link to the RSS feed above the blogads in the right column) or by downloading the file at this link. One important fact comes out in this interview about the fees. There are, in fact, two sets of fees involved in this process. The first comes from mandatory student service fees that the university collects every semester from every student. Most of the organizations listed above requested fees from those monies. However, CFACT and MPIRG have received their funding through voluntary fees based on donations that come through the registration process.

The students, during their registration, fill out a form that asks whether they wish to donate to certain campus groups. Those earmarked donations then pass to the student groups through UMTC's administration. What the SAO committee has done is to strike CFACT from this voluntary process. Since MPIRG is the ideological counterpart to CFACT on campus, that essentially leaves the process biased towards them and establishes a university endorsement for MPIRG's point of view on environmental matters. This violates the Supreme Court's direction on the use of student fees, Gilles argues.

CFACT plans to continue using the appeals process at UMTC to get their access to the voluntary donations restored. I'll update CQ readers as the story develops.

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry is