My first post on this issue seemed to spark a little chatter by the United Council twitterverse, but it appears that there have been further developments concerning the donning of business attire.
From a source within the UW-Madison delegation, I have learned that UW-Madison was verbally attacked invited to a “cordial conversation” because of the professionalism “Maditude” they exuded by wearing suits to United Council. Apparently, the United Council president believes that students from other campuses do not want to engage in conversation with the Madison delegation because they are wearing suits and seem inapproachable.
Note: Maditude – noun, a condition of possessing an attitude of superiority due to enrollment at UW-Madison. Used exclusively by other UW campuses, particularly at United Council events.
WHAT??!!! Are you kidding me?!!
For an organization that over-emphasizes nicety, tolerance of EVERYTHING (including stupid ideas) and identity, where does the UC Board get off critizing err… having a conversation about the dress of its attending, PAYING members.
If the fear is that students do not feel comfortable talking to OTHER STUDENTS! in suits then perhaps Madison would be better served by allocating $4 per student to some form of internal lobbying efforts (pumping more money into legislative affairs, Wisconsin Student Lobby, etc.)
I’d like to comment more, but I am flabbergasted by the concept that suits are a bad thing. Perhaps I haven’t been eating enough of the organic roots they serve at Stevens Point.
Filed under: ASM, University of Wisconsin | Tags: ASM, WISPIRG, Haiti, Red Cross, WSUM
By now, we are all aware of the tragic earthquake that has shaken a nation only a few hundred miles to our south. Recognizing the devastating loss of life and ruin of nearly the entire country, ASM declared a Day of Action on the UW-Madison campus to raise money for relief efforts in Haiti.
With generous donations from faculty, staff and students across campus, hundreds of volunteer hours by ASM, WISPIRG and other student organizations as well as efforts by WSUM Student Radio and local businesses, ASM’s Day of Action successfully raised $7,765 for the Red Cross.
As someone who participated in some of the planning discussions with ASM leaders and assisted by counting nearly $3,000 of the $7,765 total, I was very moved by the generosity of our students and enjoyed many of the stories passed along throughout the day.
In one instance, a young woman provided a $50 bill her grandmother gave her for Christmas and another involved a Haitian-born man who came over to one of the collection tables and spoke with volunteers praising the work they were putting into the event.
Congratulations ASM on a successful relief fundraising drive, and I hope that these efforts will encourage other campuses to contribute to relief efforts.
Filed under: Wisconsin | Tags: Democrat, Obama, Republican, Russ Feingold, Tommy Thompson
Former Wisconsin Governor Tommy Thompson continues to spur headlines about a potential Senate face-off against Democratic incumbent Russ Feingold.
According to a recently-released Rasmussen Poll of likely voters, Thompson holds a slight margin 47-43. Perhaps the more telling number is the non party-affiliated breakdown of the poll however.
“Voters not affiliated with either major party break for Thompson 53% to 36%”
Pairing this statistic with a reinvigorated Republican base backlashing against Obama’s health care plan and the poor economy, this hypothetical Senate race could turn out to be trouble for the Democratic senator.
This scenario is of course only if Thompson decides to return to Wisconsin politics. Against the remaining Republican contenders, Feingold maintains a substantial fundraising advantage and much stronger name recognition.
What are your thoughts on a Feingold-Thompson match-up?
Filed under: Uncategorized
Courtesy of the Critical Badger on University and State.
$11 billion and $6.5 billion loss? WOW!
Filed under: University of Wisconsin | Tags: United Council, University of Wisconsin, UW-Milwaukee
UW-Milwaukee’s Student Government has entertained us in the UW-Madison community recently as we have read about embezzlement schemes and records obfuscation. Today, we have witnessed another incarnation of Milwaukee’s antics.
Jay Burseth, President of the Milwaukee Student Association, authored an article in today’s Badger Herald which calls for the radical idea of $100 per class tuition for UW students.
Although I enjoy the prospect of paying less than $500 to get an education, I have difficulty figuring out how to cover UW-Madison’s $2.448 billion budget.
Should the state invest more funding in higher education? YES
Should the state increase funding for financial aid? YES
Should citizens of the state care about increasing educational opportunities for students to improve quality of life in the state? YES
Could this work? ABSOLUTELY NOT!
Substantial increases in higher education funding for the UW-System will not occur in the near future. This is a reality. Even United Council understands this as they are pushing for the state to provide enough funding to the system to maintain its current functionality.
We should focus on campus reorganization, retaining world-class faculty and improving the effectiveness and efficiency of programs for students instead of pursuing ridiculous proposals that will muster no political or financial victories.
It’s efforts like these which damage the reputations of those students attempting to work toward Reasonable and Responsible improvements for the university.
Filed under: ASM | Tags: ASM, Grant Smith, GSSF, Internal Budget, Matt Manes, SSFC, Tyler Junger
ASM Internal Budget Almost Lower Than Last Year!!!
$1,055,412.69 – Great work SSFC!
—–
10:38pm: ROLL CALL on whether or not to add STAFF POSITION { BREAKING NEWS!!!}
Romenesko: Nay
Peters: Nay
Nichols: Nay
Manes: Nay
Uraga: Nay
Smith: Nay
Burow: Aye
Fung: Aye
Everyone else abstained
—–
10:33pm: Great speech by Andrea, summed up the debate very well. Question called, we wait in suspense.
10:30pm: Fung just called me a liar about last year’s spring kickoff. Resorting to personal attacks to keep the position? I wonder who put him up to this one.
10:26pm: Fung speaks incoherently, but…. He speaks! He wants people to weigh out the risks of not having the position vs. leaving the money in the budget. Worst case scenario, intern program falls apart, other organizer quits, a lot of uncertainty. However, this is unlikely.
10:22pm: Uh oh, Manes just opened up a Favre-Rodgers can of worms
10:21pm: Jake Burow just compared the Campus Organizer to Kobe Bryant. Does this mean he believes that staff are the MVP of ASM/campus and not students? Interesting take on ASM from a “progressive” student
10:20pm: Grant Smith “The added position is probably not worth $57,000″
10:18pm: Some on SSFC believe that this position = intern program. I don’t think this can be correct, since this position spends only 20% of its time on the intern program. Earlier testimony from ASM Chair Tyler Junger indicated that responsibilities could be shifted.
10:02pm: Jake spoke about the intern program being necessary for breeding leaders, since “leaders are not born just like astronomers are not born”
10:09pm: Matt Manes concluded his speech after nearly 10 minutes. I am impressed at the length of his dictation.
9:55pm: CONTROVERSIAL TOPIC ALERT!
Martin Uraga moved to reinstate the Campus Organizer Position for purpose of debate.
This is the $57,000 question of the night.
I’m enjoying Manes’ swamp metaphor. The swamp is the murkiness as to whether or not there is need for the position. Let me clear up the murkiness. Is it nice to have? yes. Is it necessary for the organization? No.
—–
9:52pm: Grant Smith is really taking on Paulson’s proposals tonight. We are looking at the elimination of the Creative Works Fund. Thankfully, the motion FAILED.
9:51pm: ASM, which has been criticized for not advertising its services/accomplishments is no going to have less advertising money! (This specifically related to Creative Works Fund)
—–
9:48pm: I’m calling the cutting of Tenant Services. No guidelines and amount seem to have tanked the proposal.
9:44pm: CONTROVERSIAL TOPIC ALERT!
Grant Smith proposed zero-funding the Tenant Services Fund proposed by Erik Paulson. *Note, this is not the MPR Website
“Big Chunk of Change” – quote attributed to this proposal
—–
9:43pm: Motion to cut $170 from the chairs passed!
—–
9:41pm: Jake Burow displayed a show of frustration indicative of not understanding Manes’ proposal.
—–
9:35pm: Manes is now proposing to strike $170 from Academic Affairs, Diversity, Legislative Affairs and Nominations Stipends (this is set as 55% of tuition)
Debate has made it readily apparent that the SSFC does not comprehend Rep. Manes’ metric for tying stipends to tuition. Instead, SSFC has decided to utilize arbitrary numbers to establish stipends as has been tradition in the past.
—–
9:29pm:
Chair Stipend Increased
Vice Chair Stipend Increased
Secretary Stipend Stays Same
Finance Chair Stipend Increased
Shared Gov Chair Stipend Increased
Diversity Chair Stipend Stays Same
Nominations Chair Stipend Stays Same
Legislative Affairs Chair Stipend Stays Same
Academic Affairs Chair Stipend Stays Same
—–
9:28pm: Still discussing stipends. Appears inconsistency will reign. Willing to pay SSFC leaders more, willing to pay for nearly all GSSF positions, not willing to pay ASM leaders more.
—–
9:15pm: The SSFC has yielded to me on a number of issues most recently stipend increases.
My personal take is that ASM students are underpaid. If we want chairs to perform, we have to pay them for their work. If a student has to choose between a $9/hour job for 20 hours per week or a 20/hour per week position in ASM for $5300 over the course of 48 weeks (about $5.50/hour), I know what most students would choose – especially considering the $19,000 price tag for attending this university.
—–
9:07pm: This is an interesting phenomenon. Committee members who funded nearly every student hourly position for GSSF groups are opposed to increasing compensation for ASM leadership.
—–
8:59pm: In typical fashion, SSFC (as it has done the past 3 years) speaks out against paying more to its chairs. It’s amazing how many patterns you witness annually when you’ve been in the organization for 4 years.
—–
8:52pm: Matt Manes is proposing major stipend reform in ASM. This merits additional commentary.
In earlier conversations with Manes, we discussed a model of student government leader funding by establishing stipends based on percentages of tuition in lieu of the previous practice (where numbers were arbitrarily selected). The new proposal equalizes the value of a position over time. In essence, as tuition increases, stipends increase proportionally.
Percentage proposal from Manes
ASM Chair: 100% tuition
ASM Vice Chair: 85% tuition
Finance Chair: 75% tuition
Shared Governance Chair: 70% tuition
Other Committee Chairs: 60% tuition
ASM Secretary: 30% tuition
Passed Earlier: SSFC Chair (90% tuition), SSFC Vice Chair (80% tuition)
—–
8:47pm: They are reducing advertising too!
—–
8:44pm: Disabilities funding is now part of the discussion. Currently, ASM funds $25,000 to pay for captionists and interpreters for students with disabilities to attend events (similar to McBurney but for extracurriculars). Proposal is to reduce down to $15,000 (last year, only $12,000 was spent).
—–
8:43pm: SSFC just voted to move $10,000 from event grants and $15,000 from travel grants to add $25,000 to operations grants. Less people going away from campus and more people buying paperclips!
—–
8:37pm: SSFC has motioned to move money from event grants to operations grants. Tim Fung is speaking now.
—–
8:27pm: Just came back from recess, and the current budget proposal stands at $1,107,112.69.
_________________________________________________________________________________________
After a highly thought-provoking and engaging seminar on Law and Liberty w/Prof Schweber, I made it to the SSFC meeting in time to speak in Open Forum.
On tonight’s agenda, the SSFC will finalize its decision on the ASM Internal Budget. Major topics for tonight include
1) Campus Organizer
2) Stipends
3) Tenant Rating Services
I will attempt to live-blog throughout the night.
Hello small circle of BTP fans!
I have decided to reemerge from hibernation to discuss campus and state politics yet again. I will promise at least one post per week, and I hope to publish more like 4-5 times per week, but we will see how the semester goes.
I wanted to comment on something I heard today emerging from the United Council Board of Directors. Apparently, the United Council Board has decided that they are to no longer wear suits to conferences and meetings, because “people wearing suits are not approachable.” – from a source close to the organization.
It makes me wonder how effective they are at lobbying, if they are uncomfortable approaching people in suits.
Filed under: ASM | Tags: Brandon Williams, Carl Fergus, CFACT, CWC, MCSC, Michael Romenesko, SSFC, STRC, STU
11:00: I think the end of major substantive items has occurred. The committee will conclude with a presentation/training on Contract Status. I will try to post a little reaction and commentary after the conclusion of the meeting.
10:47: Onto the denial letter approvals. Perhaps Chair Williams should use the find and replace function in Microsoft Word in the future.
10:44: SSFC has found no procedural violation and has committed drafting responsibility to the Chair by a vote of 4-3-2.
10:31: No one has decided to reconsider (and they cannot tonight), so Fergus has moved to commit the drafting of the letter to Chair Williams.
10:25: Chair Williams and the Committee now get to decide what happens!
10:21: “Unintentional ignorance” is alleged of SSFC. Interesting.
10:18: CWC alleges these as specific violations:
Specific violations – SSFC did not consider all information available and made a decision based on incomplete data.
Supplements were vague and not looked at properly.
10:08: CWC’s appeal on procedural grounds has begun.
– Charge SSFC with making a vague decision, abstentions should count as no votes and a disagreement over whether or not a motion to reconsider can be in order.
10:03: MCSC is approved for eligibility by a vote of 9-0-0.
10:02: It appears that MCSC will be receiving eligibility. Just waiting for everyone to say they agree.
10:01: Kyle continues to berate other committee members.
9:59: I just stepped back into the room after a brief hiatus. SSFC already denied WisLit and is now discussing MCSC.
9:27: SPILL has a very chic powerpoint presentation and is going down the list of criteria one by one. It is very clear what they do by their presentation. This cannot be said for all groups.
9:23: CFACT is done, now it’s time to SPILL!
9:19: Despite not providing specific information, the way CFACT arrived at their time percentage numbers comes from their personal experience (as uncovered by a query from Tim Fung)
9:14: CFACT refused to break down time spent on campaigns, interesting. Why is CFACT not answering the questions SSFC is asking about the campaigns they run?
9:08: CFACT had a Student Activity Center Policy Violation.
– They used seats from outside the office in the office.
– Fergus asked about why it happened again and if the movement of chairs was intentional. Response: No.
8:57: CFACT presents its eligibility:
- Claimed Direct Services-
Education, Training and Forum for environmental and other issues
1) Advocacy Training (20%)
2) Campaign Program (30%)
3) Stewardship (15%)
4) Networking (15%)
5) Workshops (10%)
** Percent is indicative of time spent according to the presenters **
8:52: Carl spoke against smileys and other emoticons – he may not be happy 
8:47: Kyle continues to accuse SSFC members of not wanting his org to get money. He is also accusing committee members of damaging the SSFC process. “Turnout is demonstrative of disgust of SSFC”
– This added presence could be indicative of interest and not necessarily of disgust. Just a thought I wanted to add.
8:43: Adam Breihan came to express his “disgust of SSFC.” He can’t find justifiable reasoning to deny STRC except for Michael Romenesko’s “personal hate” for Kyle. [Full disclosure: Breihan was (and is?) part of STU (STRC?)]. Now he is accusing committee members of things the supposedly did. Interesting strategy of not opening for questions.
8:41: One of the STRC guys came to speak about STRC doing work and meeting criteria and how tenant services are needed on campus. Student Tenant Union membership has changed for the STRC. However, STU was a previous “manifestation” of this organization.
8:40: Said person appealed to SSFC for a rehearing for CWC
8:39: Zorian came to speak about someone they have assisting them with procedure.
____________________________________________________________________________________
Tonight’s Lineup is better than a Yankees-Red Sox Game:
CFACT
SPILL
UW WisLit
MCSC
CWC
(and apparently an appeal by WisChoices for reconsideration)
Let’s see how this night goes. I will attempt to live blog
Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: ASM, Badger Herald, CFLI, College Republicans, Daily Cardinal, FIGS, Madison Initiative for Undergraduates, ODOS, Patrick McEwen, PAVE, SSFC, United Council, Wisconsin Student Lobby, WISPIRG
Only days before proposals for the Madison Initiative for Undergraduates funding are due, the Associated Students of Madison (ASM) has teamed up with the Office of the Dean of Students to host a public forum for student input. The Badger Herald article can be found here.
In attendance are representatives from:
ASM
College Republicans
WISPIRG
Daily Cardinal
Wisconsin Student Lobby
Student Services Finance Committee (SSFC)
United Council
Badger Herald
Provost’s Office
Dean of Students
Center for Leadership and Involvement
Center for the First Year Experience
PAVE
College of Letters and Science
and concerned students
Some Ideas from the Town Hall:
1) Coordination of Leadership Development
– Under this proposal, CFLI would hire a leadership coordinator to assist students in finding/pursuing leadership development opportunities on campus
– Furthermore, the Leadership Certificate would be improved
– Creating an E-Portfolio for campus leadership activities (including assistance for distribution to grad schools, employers, etc.)
– Currently CFLI is working with leadership groups from across the university on this proposal
2) Peer Advising
– Hiring students to help students with career advising
– Integrated advising structures (career, academic and campus combined)
– Major-specific peer advising
– It might a good idea to hire recent grads for one-year positions as advisors (full time job + student perspective)
3) Textbook Resources
– Open source textbooks (cheap or free online textbooks)
– Providing incentives to encourage professors to utilize these services and produce these types of textbooks
4) Ensuring that hired professors emphasize teaching over research
Comment: I’m not sure this one could actually formulate correctly, but I can understand the sentiment. It is important that we have researchers at this university. It is important for funding and University ranking.
Other notes:
Letters and Science has received 31 proposals for the MIU, according to Dean Gary Sandefur. Also, L&S will be looking into adding FIGS (First Year Interest Groups) and improving advising in large majors.
– Interesting point on FIGS, are people disuaded from participating due to course variety?
There are also discussions of SprIGS and SIGS (Spring FIGS and Sophomore Interest Groups) – Interesting ideas
I’m liking this discussion on FIGS. (Adam Sheka spoke about his situation where he did not want to pick up Japanese as the “3rd course,” so he did not take a FIG).
This common theme of the “3rd course” seems to keep popping up. Patrick McEwen proposed a FIG existing with 2 courses shared amongst all students in the group and selecting one of two option “3rd courses”
ODOS-related Proposals
1) Enhancing GUTS and other tutoring
2) Improving transfer student programming
3) International student programming enhancement
4) Expanding CP 125 (Wisconsin Experience Class)
5) Early intervention programming
Technology
– Bridging the technology divide for professors (Basically, teach professors how to use our current technology)
– I proposed looking into creating online classes for the large intro/gen-ed classes to utilize professor time more efficiently. (You can watch a lecture online as easily as you can watch a lecture in a classroom you sit in).
