In a year that saw no shortage of political intrigue, perhaps the story hitting closest to home for UW-Madison was Chancellor Martin's New Badger Partnership. The plan floated the ideas of ""flexibility"" and ""autonomy"" from the state. At first, the plan was largely ignored—mainly since few concrete details were widely publicized.
But once news of a $125 million budget cut to the university hit campus, people began to care. Meanwhile, Gov. Walker and Chancellor Martin worked together to drastically change UW-Madison's governance structure.
The plan would have wisely given the state's flagship university needed flexibilities, splitting it from the system under a new public authority model. For the first time, a UW-Madison chancellor asked for serious reforms to Wisconsin's public higher education system.
The plan showed that government seemed ready to allow UW-Madison to improve itself, since it is clear state government is merely getting in the university's way. Along with its own Board of Trustees, the university would gain more control over personnel, construction and other resources. For a short while it seemed like a deal was struck to help the state trim its budget while alleviating the pain to the university in the short term and giving it the strength to prosper in the future.
But what many saw as a good fix for the state university system, others saw as favoritism. Vocal critics of the reforms, like state Representative Stephen Nass, R-Whitewater, worried about potential negative effects on smaller universities. This fear led to an early death for the New Badger Partnership. For a while after, Nass and other critics offered no solution, once again exhibiting how education often suffers due to legislative inefficiencies and pandering.
Fortunately on Friday, June 3, the Joint Finance Committee struck a deal to preserve portions of the original plan. Although the legislation does not offer a dedicated UW-Madison board of trustees, which would have helped UW-Madison focus more on itself than an entire system, it should still be signed into law by Gov. Walker.
The original plan clearly ignored the smaller state universities, and it is not surprising that other universities wanted what UW-Madison had asked for. Wisely, the Joint Finance Committee's plan grants all state universities more ""flexibilities"" in purchases, travel and personnel decisions. If the universities are able to handle the added responsibilities, then these changes would allow each university to make better financial decisions.
Another positive aspect of the plan is a reduced cut-now $94 million to UW-Madison's budget. The smaller burden is necessary, because the university will have to limit tuition increases to 5.5 percent for the next two years. It is only fair that the university faces fewer cuts when it is not allowed to control its tuition, as it would under the New Badger Partnership.
The Joint Finance Committee's tuition proposal is preferable, since it will help keep tuition affordable—something out-of-state students will greatly appreciate. Besides its academics, a big draw for UW-Madison is its price tag. If tuition and fees continue to rise, it could start driving out-of-state students away. Moreover, it is encouraging to see legislators work together to help keep tuition affordable and give universities a way to deal with that cap, especially as the economy remains lethargic. With uncertain funding and a wary economy, legislators needed to address how the state distributed and organized funding. Fortunately, the plan will set university block grants in a separate dedicated fund, according to a campus-wide email from Chancellor Martin. This will help prevent transferring funds to other purposes, which has occurred in previous years.
This new funding scheme is the clearest sign that legislators finally understand they need to change the way they fund higher education. They are the obvious first steps in reforming state investment in education, a sector that generates everything from jobs, theories and medical cures.
This plan improves upon the already positive New Badger Partnership. It gives all universities more flexibility, which could save the state money and increase efficiency—something government so often lacks. It will also be a good stepping stone to full autonomy for UW-Madison, if that is a route Chancellor Martin still would like to take.
So what began as a plan with poorly publicized details has quickly become some of the biggest reforms in UW System's history. It is rare when government officials relinquish control and let others manage themselves, and Gov. Walker would be wise to push to put the Joint Finance Committee's plan into law. It is the right thing to do to continue to provide UW-Madison's 40,000 students with an experience of their lifetime.
Matt Beaty is a junior majoring in math and computer science. We welcome all feedback. Please send responses to opinion@dailycardinal.com.
