Spend tuition on improving education, not financial aid

I just don't get it. Every day we hear from professors, administrators, department heads and campus leaders that there isn't enough money to support their particular program to its full capability. We as students hear that we aren't getting the full education we should be, due to lack of funds. Students can't get the classes needed to graduate because there isn't enough money to fund more class sections. Whole departments have to be merged together to save in administration costs.

So what does the university propose in regards to tuition: a full $1,000 increase for in-state students and $1,250 for out-of-state students. So far so good, to me. Maybe my extra dollars will help fund another accounting 210 section or a new interesting GenEd class. But wait, only half of that money will ever get to where it should be going. Instead of spending our hard-earned money on improving the quality of education for students, administrators want to give a full 50 percent of it away to financial assistance.

A true $1,000 revenue increase per student could go a long way in softening the universities' financial woes, but it doesn't look like were going to get there. I'm not saying that financial aid is a bad thing, but spending 50 percent of the tuition increase on it is absurd. There are other ways to fund an education than simply relying on state assistance. I know I have private loan I'll be paying off for ten years after I graduate. I want my extra $1,250 to support programs that will not only benefit myself, but every UA student ... not waive the fees of a select few.

Garrick Keatts
pre-business sophomore

University, as well as state, responsible for budget woes

This letter is in response to Phil Leckman's Monday column, "Budget cuts could have been avoided." Mr. Leckman is correct that state lawmakers are responsible for some of the financial shortfalls currently experienced by the University of Arizona. However, as a December 2001 article in the Phoenix New Times shows, financial shenanigans here at the university are also very much to blame.

Here's what happened: In the late '70s, then-president John Schaefer decided that the UA should become a premiere research institution. But there wasn't enough lab space. So the UA asked the legislature for the permission to issue bonds to pay for specific projects, such as the construction of the Life Sciences building. But the university wanted a better building than they had asked the legislature to approve, so they built most of the building and then used money earmarked for other university projects to finish the building. This scheme became fairly common practice here at the UA, causing the UA to incur millions of dollars of debt (since the bonds have to be paid back eventually).

Apparently President Peter Likins curtailed much of this "creative accounting" when he took the helm, but he has nonetheless continued along this crash course of endless building. Administrators claim that construction budgets are encapsulated from budgets that cover other university expenses, such as teacher salaries, but that statement is disingenuous. When the UA re-finances and consolidates its bonds (as it is continuing to do now), what happens is that tuition money goes to pay for past construction. That's because in bond consolidation, almost any revenue can be used to pay off the new bonds. Translation: money that was supposed to go to pay for student services and education goes to construction.

Added to this is the fact that one of the UA's bond underwriters, Lehman Brothers, is involved in atrocious violations of human rights through its financial relationships with the private prison industry. So the university's bond underwriting schemes not only hurt students, they help perpetuate instances of abuse, rape, forced prostitution and labor violations in private prisons.

The university made a deal with the devil when it decided to prioritize construction over education and to fund that construction with money tainted by prison corporations.

Rachel Wilson
Students Against Sweatshops member
Infant Speech Perception Lab

Forget McKale student section, attend other sports instead

For the past few days, I've been reading letters from people pleading with the university to take steps to improve our men's basketball student section. I couldn't agree with them more, but I have my doubts that this is a realistic wish. Simply put, this university doesn't seem to care much for its students. This may be somewhat of an overstatement, but look at the evidence: a) The school spends too much money on useless construction projects, money that could be better spent on, say, retaining faculty so there are more classes open. About 10 students had to sit in the lobby the first day of my math class because there were that many people trying to add the class, b) There is not even ample parking for the students who have to commute because, again, parking spots are being lost to construction projects, or in favor of garages so the university can charge $400 a car, and c) despite all the talk in Phoenix of deficits and budget shortfalls, we are still admitting more students than we can accommodate and still spending money on useless construction projects.

If all these bigger problems are going unresolved, I honestly do not believe that a bigger student section in McKale is in the foreseeable future. In the meantime, I suggest that we support the other athletics programs that want students there, such as women's basketball, gymnastics, softball, etc.

Jennifer Reik
elementary education sophomor