Not so valuable Editorial out of South Jersey on college spending

[srru86]

Atlantic City Press
More college spending oversight may not help, probably can't hurt
I beg to differ.

Look, the Snooki thing is stupid but not really the issue in that it wasn't public money. When the legislature funds it, they can have a say, otherwise they should stay out if it.

As to the Showboat-Stockton thing that was all about politicians using the College to advance a political-economic agenda. Namely attempt save the dying seaside town with a not so well thought out plan. So I don't know how getting more political inputs helps. Same with all the boondoggle money going to the Rutgers-Camden/Rowan joint project and Rowan specific Christmas tree spending public works patronage projects.The problem ain't the Colleges, it's the political hacks looking to score. This was a South Jersey machine Norcross- Sweeney promoted, Christie Ok'd move. Don't blame the University president, or politically appointed board, that was doing their bidding.

No higher ed institution in NJ was more closely tied to political will than UMDNJ. We know how that went down.

 

[retired711]

Atlantic City Press
More college spending oversight may not help, probably can't hurt
I beg to differ.

Look, the Snooki thing is stupid but not really the issue in that it wasn't public money. When the legislature funds it, they can have a say, otherwise they should stay out if it.

As to the Showboat-Stockton thing that was all about politicians using the College to advance a political-economic agenda. Namely attempt save the dying seaside town with a not so well thought out plan. So I don't know how getting more political inputs helps. Same with all the boondoggle money going to the Rutgers-Camden/Rowan joint project and Rowan specific Christmas tree spending public works patronage projects.The problem ain't the Colleges, it's the political hacks looking to score. This was a South Jersey machine Norcross- Sweeney promoted, Christie Ok'd move. Don't blame the University president, or politically appointed board, that was doing their bidding.

No higher ed institution in NJ was more closely tied to political will than UMDNJ. We know how that went down.

Your main points are valid. But I question your assertion that boondoggle money is going to the Rutgers-Camden/Rowan joint project. (I think you mean the Rutgers-Camden/Cooper project, a more precise name for it. ) So far the result has been the construction of a Nursing/Sciences building that is certainly good for Rutgers-Camden (we have a lot of nursing students and have had not much in the way of facilities for them). While I am not wild about the location -- on the way from Rutgers-Camden to Cooper, but it is not an unreasonable place to put the school -- we haven't got unused space on the main Rutgers-Camden campus unless you destroy a couple of badly-needed parking lots.

 

[srru86]

Your main points are valid. But I question your assertion that boondoggle money is going to the Rutgers-Camden/Rowan joint project. (I think you mean the Rutgers-Camden/Cooper project, a more precise name for it. ) So far the result has been the construction of a Nursing/Sciences building that is certainly good for Rutgers-Camden (we have a lot of nursing students and have had not much in the way of facilities for them). While I am not wild about the location -- on the way from Rutgers-Camden to Cooper, but it is not an unreasonable place to put the school -- we haven't got unused space on the main Rutgers-Camden campus unless you destroy a couple of badly-needed parking lots.

I'n not saying there is not good money to be spent making RU-Camden a better campus. I'm not opposed to some State money going to Camden more generally. But don't blame the colleges when things don't work out the way the politicians wished. The paper is making it out to be unrestrained educational bureaucrats as the root of the problem. Their answer is to double down on political interference.

But whenever Norcross, or one of his minions, is around we should all clutch our wallets tight.

 

[retired711]

I'n not saying there is not good money to be spent making RU-Camden a better campus. I'm not opposed to some State money going to Camden more generally. But don't blame the colleges when things don't work out the way the politicians wished. The paper is making it out to be unrestrained educational bureaucrats as the root of the problem. Their answer is to double down on political interference.

But whenever Norcross, or one of his minions, is around we should all clutch our wallets tight.

I agree with what you say. But I think we should agree that colleges also contribute to ballooning costs. Administrative costs have gone up hugely. To be fair, though, some of that increase is due to the need to supply more support to students than was traditionally done.

 

[srru86]

I agree with what you say. But I think we should agree that colleges also contribute to ballooning costs. Administrative costs have gone up hugely. To be fair, though, some of that increase is due to the need to supply more support to students than was traditionally done.

Oh, I agree, there has been lots of reasons for the inflation of college costs and we that have been part of the system can't claim no impact .
And as you say students themselves and their need, or demand, for upgraded services and amenities are a piece of the puzzle.
Certainly some college administrators have been at times lazy, profligate, self indulgent and venal.
But I think on average the record for college bureaucrats is better than the politicians on all those fronts.

 

[retired711]

Oh, I agree, there has been lots of reasons for the inflation of college costs and we that have been part of the system can't claim no impact .
And as you say students themselves and their need, or demand, for upgraded services and amenities are a piece of the puzzle.
Certainly some college administrators have been at times lazy, profligate, self indulgent and venal.
But I think on average the record for college bureaucrats is better than the politicians on all those fronts.

OK, but that's a low standard!

 

[srru86]

OK, but that's a low standard!

Ha! That's a good one