U.'s state allocation is becoming politicized

Despite its best efforts, the University will likely have little control over how the state legislature considers and votes on its state funding. Although University officials have kept heavy lobbying pressure on Harrisburg for several months, the legislature's decision on whether to cut the University's appropriation will likely come down to politics, not the University's merits. Several legislators and University officials said this week the University has become a pawn in a political battle over the pressing budget problems the state faces. While the University is pushing for full funding because of its "good citizenship" in the state, it will in all likelihood receive support in exchange for either approval of a tax package or some other partisan proposal. "The problems of other non-preferred higher education institutions will be solved politically," House Minority Leader Matthew Ryan (R-Delaware Co.) said Monday. "I hate to be political, but it is political." Several Democratic leaders maintain that legislators concerned about the University's proposed appropriation must lend support to a comprehensive tax-increase package larger than the one Casey proposed. The state does not have enough money, they say, to give the University more than $19 million without more revenue. Casey proposed, in his February budget announcement, slashing the University's funding while supporting the largest tax-increase package in the state's history. Giving more money to non-state-related colleges and universities will require even higher tax increases, House Education Committee Chairperson Ronald Cowell (D-Allegheny) said Tuesday. "The real friends of higher education are those legislators who will vote for tax increases to pay for the spending," Cowell said Tuesday. But Republican House leader Ryan said that most Republicans oppose the cuts to the University and other non-state-related colleges. It is realistic, he said, to expect the state house to approve a funding level nearly equal to last year's. He added that his party would not support other sections of the budget until the schools' appropriation received a "major" increase. Ryan did not specify what parts of the budget the Republicans would veto if the University's appropriation did not increase. Legislators have maintained the University will be treated the same way as the other non-state-related colleges and universities. Casey proposed funding cuts to all of these schools by between 45 and 60 percent. This status puts the University at the bottom of the barrel for state funding -- irrespective of its longstanding relationship with the state. The University began its fight against Casey's budget proposal -- the largest lobbying effort on the University's behalf in recent history -- days after he made his budget address. Assistant Vice President for Commonwealth Relations James Shada and President Sheldon Hackney said this week their effort is not far along and that a "Plan B" may be necessary, although both say they have received favorable reaction from state leaders. Since February, Shada, Hackney and Senior Vice President Marna Whittington have visited high-ranking party leadership in both the House and Senate. The Medical School, Vet School and Trustees who are Pennsylvania residents have started letter-writing campaigns to statehouse members. Dental School administrators have contacted area legislators to explain how Casey's proposals would affect local residents, while Vet School Dean Edwin Andrews has spoken with several state farm organizations about the importance of the Vet School, the only one in the state. Additionally, the president's office wrote 5300 selected alumni living in Pennsylvania to ask them to contact their state legislators, Shada said. These measures, along with others, have sent a message to legislators that the University is highly important to the state in terms of prestige and economic impact and that its quality would diminish without more money. This message, legislators say, has been difficult to avoid. "I know there's a lot of concern on your campus across the board for institutions of higher education," Cowell said. The University also attempted to send a message to Harrisburg in its budget announcements in March, proposing to cut 300 jobs, halt nearly all construction projects, and decrease the growth of financial aid for the 1992-93 academic year. But political leaders disagree over whether the University's budget held political sway. University Budget Director Stephen Golding said Monday the University has begun implementing Hackney's budget despite hopes the University would receive more money. Schools, resource centers and administrative offices have already decided where they are cutting back for next year, Golding said, and the administration will present to the Board of Trustees a deficit just under the $6.7 million ceiling approved by the Trustees Executive Board. Golding said if the University received more than the proposed $19 million in state funding, the University will hold discussions on what funding cuts will be restored. But restoring the cuts to the Dental, Vet and Medical schools would be among the "first priorities" because doing so would reduce the University's planned deficit. Afterwards, the administrators would discuss restoring cuts to the schools and resource centers, to initiatives such as the Trustees' Professorship Fund and to undergraduate financial aid. Golding emphasized the process is a fluid one and that budgets would be supplemented depending on the amount of money the University regained and when the state approved the University's appropriation. Legislators say they hope to get the budget process completed by June 30, but add that given the dire financial straits the state faces, it could be impossible. Because there is no deadline for the state to appropriate funds to the University, its state appropriation has been approved as late as December in the past.

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.