A Porn Policy?

After a failed attempt to cancel a showing of Pirates II: Stagnetti's Revenge by State Senator Andy Harris, he tried to tie capital construction funds for the USM to the development of a policy limiting explicit material on campuses.  Senate President Miller called the amendment to the budget out of order.  The chamber supported Miller by a vote of 35-12. 

But surely, this issue is far from over.  The legislature may ask governing bodies of public institutions to report on policies for explicit material.  And, governing bodies, like the Board of Regents, may pass a policy to preempt any legislation limiting funding for higher education before next session.  It looks like the issue has cooled off for now, but keep your eyes open on the issue.

In my previous post, I noted my opposition for any limitations, in legislation or policy, on First Amendment rights and freedom of expression on university campuses:

Viewing a pornographic film on campus in the student union is distasteful.  But this conversation is about much more.  It's about the innapropriate use of legislative authority.Senator Harris' attempt to use the power of the purse to limit academic freedom and societal discourse at USM institutions is irresponsible and out of place.  The film cost no money to the university, and the student activities board thought it to be a positive component to the discourse on the UMCP campus.  While i find the movie distasteful, I fear of the potential for censorship to come on Senator Harris' and other's moral beliefs.  When dealing with adults in our nation, we have celebrated a long standing tradition of free speech.  Why should this change in campuses of public universities?  Additionally, the legislature should respect the administrative authority of the USM and the UMCP administration in governing public universities in Maryland on such administrative issues.  This move flies in the face of the principle of the First Amendment.

Accordingly, I will likely not support a USM policy, envisioned by Senator Harris.  Thoughts?

USM Budget Compromise

With the legislative session in Annapolis on Monday, Senate and House leaders have been hard at work coming to a compromise on budget issues, including funding for the University System of Maryland.  In his original budget for higher education, Governor O'Malley proposed at $28 million increase for the University System of Maryland, $16.9 million dedicated to offsetting lost revenues from a tuition freeze for in-state students.  Recall, the House and Senate were at odds on cuts from the Governor's original budget, in an effort to offset lower-than-expected tax revenues:

• House - $10.8 million from annual budget; $10 million from fund balance
• Senate - $5.4 million from annual budget; $4 million from fund balance

The Budget Conference Committee reconciled the budget late Tuesday night.  Here is the outcome:

• $5.8 million annual budget; $9 million from fund balance

It's questionable as to whether this $14.8 million cut will afford the system a tuition freeze again this year.  The Board of Regents will discuss and decide on this issue in coming weeks.  More to come on the Governor's federal stimulus supplementary budget...

Textbook Legislation passes the House

The House of Delegates passed their version of a Textbook Bill today, after a favorable review with amendments from the Appropriations Committee on Saturday.  Substantive changes reduce administrative burdens to universities and bookstores, which will ensure that the cost of textbooks is not inadvertenly increased.  A few amendments seem to cater to book publishers, skirting provisions attempting to address bundling and integrated textbooks.  Here is a list of amendments that I will advocate for:

• On page 4 Line 15 C.1.III remove the word "not"  to read "Which textbooks are integrated textbooks and are therefore subject to subsection (F) (3) of this section, as reported by the publisher under subsection (E) of this section."
• On page 5 Line 33 D.2.II.5  remove the word "not" to read "...that an integrated textbook is subject to subsection (F)(3) of this section."
• On page 6 Line 20, E.1.III:  reinstate "expressed as an itemized list."
• On page 6 Line 24&25 E.1.V:  reinstate "Variances in price, if any, between bundled and unbundled items."

With two versions of the bill passed in the House and the Senate, a conference committee will be convened.  The committee will include three senators and three delegates, and four of the six must come to consensus on an acceptable version of the bill.  Then, comparable amendments are submitted to both bodies; 50% approval of the new bill is needed from both houses prior to April 13.  

The House bill generally addresses most of my concerns with the bill regarding administrative burdens and limitations on academic freedom.  Hopefully, members of the Senate and House cancome to a reasonable agreement, hopefully much closer to the House version, so that the bill does not have the same fate as last year's version.

**TAKE ACTION** Support Full Funding for Higher Education

Funding for USM institutions is at risk!  The House Appropriations Committee voted to decrease funding by $20.3 million last week.  Take 2 minutes to let your elected representatives know how important it is to support higher education (if you are an out-of-state student, feel free to use your campus address).

Click this link to TAKE ACTION to send an email message to your legislators letting them know that you support full-funding of the Governor's budget.  The sooner you send, the better.  Forward this link to your friends, parents, neighbors, and professors so that legislators hear how important funding higher education is (they can use this specific link).  It only takes a few minutes by simply entering your address and editing a pre-drafted message.  Be sure to let your legislators know your role in the USM (student, faculty, etc.).

A cut of $20.3 million will ensure tuition is not frozen for in-state undergaduates, lower the quality of programs for all students, and could threaten pay/job security for faculty and staff.

If you have further questions, please email me ASAP at joshmichael@umbc.edu or call me at (410) 294-8581.

Read this message from the USM website:

Support Higher Education Funding  Oppose Legislative Cuts to Higher Education

Governor O’Malley’s FY 2010 budget proposal for the University System of Maryland supports the overarching goals shared by the state and the University System of Maryland:

• provide access to high-quality and affordable programs and services;
• ensure that the state’s public higher education system sustains its critical role in advancing Marylanders’ quality of life—intellectually, economically, socially, culturally, and in areas related to health.

The Department of Legislative Services is reccomending the General Assembly cut the USM funding by $5.7 million dollars and possibly more. Ask your legislators to reject this cut and fully fund higher education to maintain the quality, affordability and accessability of our public universities.

Cuts proposed in the House, debate over tuition freeze

The subcommittee on Education of the House Appropriations Committee voted last week to cut the USM Budget another $20.3 million as part of an effort to balance the state budget.  Of the $20.3 million, $10 million will come from the base operating budget (meaning a carry-over cut in years out) and $10.3 from the fund balance, meaning a one-time cut from the USM's savings that are used to sure up bonds for buildings.

The Governor proposed in his budget this year to increase funding for higher education by $27 million, $16.9 million dedicated to supporting a fourth straight tuition freeze for undergraduate students.  The increases, together, would both maintain quality and increase affordability by holding down the cost of tuition for students. 

Yet, after cutting $20.1 million from the budget, House officials still feel that the USM should hold the line on tuition.  Subcommittee Chair Delegate John Bohanan said, 

I would hope and doubt that the impact would result in a tuition hike for students...In the end, higher education is going to fare extremely well.

In the Governor's original budget, the tuition freeze support funding is listed as a separate line-item.  Delegates left this language in, assuming that the designation would ensure that the money would actually be used to hold tuition.

USM Chancellor Brit Kirwan expressed that this was not the case, and that with general fund dollars cut, that the tuition freeze dollars would then simply fill the whole of depleted funds.  The Board of generally only supported "funded" tuition freezes, of which the house proposal would not be.

I personally am opposed to the concept of an "unfunded" tuition freeze, as is the case in the House version of the budget.  Fortunately, the Board of Regents sets tuition policies, partially removing the decision from political pressures.  Chancellor Kirwan has highlighted that higher education in Maryland appreciates all the support and recognizes the need to cut the budget during the tough ficsal times--but not at the cost of major deficiences in quality.  

While the House version is far from the final proposal, the move to institute an "unfunded" tuition freeze from legislators is concerning.  With strapped universities, quality erodes.  Class sizes grow, faculty are overloaded, library resources remain stagnant, campus hours shorten, other fees arise, among other indicators.  A moderate tuition increase is an appropriate compromise if the state cannot fund the USM budget to the appropriate level.

But, in the meantime, the Senate is still in the process of developing its budget proposal.  Traditionally, the Senate is a bit more liberal in supporting higher education.  I have met with both the Chair of Budget and Taxation, Senator Currie, and the Chair of the Education subcommittee, Senate Kasemeyer, who both said to me that they plan to provide full funding for a tuition freeze.  So, we continue to share our concerns and thoughts with members in the Senate.  Once the Senate has a budget proposal, the House and Senate will meet in conference committee to work out details.

Check out articles highlighting developments:

- in The Sun

- in The Diamondback

- in The Chronicle of Higher Education

Tuition freeze warming up

Monday , Governor O'Malley stood with Senators Cardin and Mikulski at Bowie State University, explaining that the federal stimulus package would allow for greater investment in community colleges and for full-funding of a fourth year of an in-state, undergraduate tuition freeze.  The dedication of federal stimulus dollars seemed to seal the deal a fourth tuition freeze...

But on Tuesday , Governor O'Malley instead sat with Budget Secretary Eloise Foster, legislative leaders, and budget analysts, explaining that revenue estimates came in even lower than the already deflated expectations.  According to estimate, the Governor needs to fill an additional $516 million hole, tallying the total deficit to $1.1 billion.  Further layoffs, furloughs, and pay cuts have been put back on the table.  And of course, funding to support a funded tuition freeze has as well.

Updates are sure to come in future days.  Recall that the Board of Regents (of which I am your student representative to) officially sets tuition rates, and will do so after the Legislative Session, which ends in mid-April.

Textbook Update

During my hiatus last week, a number of advancements have occurred in the realm of textbooks.  After a worthwhile hearing in the House on February 17, Delegate Rice committed to proposing significant amendments to the House version of the bill (HB 85 ) which will be submitted soon.  At the same time, the Senate Bill (SB 183) was scheduled for a Senate floor vote on Friday February 20.  Senator Middleton raised significant concerns on the floor, and first laid over the bill to Tuesday February 24.  On the floor, a number of amendments were proposed.  An amendment to change the publication timeline of textbook selections to once the order is "finalized" failed 22-24.  An amendment by Senator Astle to change "affirm and acknowledge" to "acknowledge" in section D passed 25-22.

So, the bill has passed in the Senate 45-0 in its current form.  The Senate now waits for the House to finalize the cross-filed bill.  If there are any differences in the two bills, a conference Committee will be formed.  This appears to be likely with the House adopting amendments supported by the USM Students panel, the USM, Community Colleges, Independent Colleges, MHEC, and Bookstores.

One major compromise that will likely be included is extending the publication of the textbook selection in Section G from the earlier of 1 week or the final selection to 30 days after the original selection.  The student panel testified that publication 1 week after the original selection would require bookstores to publish unfinalized information and then students could purchase wrong books.  The compromise extends this timeline to 30 days.  Do recall, at all USM schools, all selections must be posted for the Fall semester by May 1 and for the Spring semester by December 1.

This compromise, and the inclusion of Senator Astle's amendment, adequately address the main concerns that I have outlined.  I have pulled the letter from the CapWiz program at UMBC and will be working with student leaders to develop a consensus on the issue.  The Senate bill still raises issues, but the House amendments, expected from Delegate Rice, will be satisfactory and in the end, actually help students.

Testimony on House Bill 85

I testified on Tuesday as part of a panel of USM student leaders expressing support with amendments to House Bill 85.  The USM Student Council voted unanimously (10-0) at its 2/9 meeting to only support the bill with substantial amendments. Panel members included:

• Bill Logan, Towson undergraduate, Chair of USM Student Council
  
• Brady Walker, University of Baltimore law, Vice Chair of USM Student Council
  
• Sarah Elfreth, Towson undergraduate, Towson SGA and 2009-2010 USM Student Regent
  
• Roberto Munster, UMCP graduate, UMCP Graduate Student Government and USM Student Council member
  

Our testimony highlighted a number of additions and concerns, addressing concerns of costly administrative burdens, publication of unconfirmed information, limitations on academic freedom, an possible unintended consequences.  We submitted an amended version for review (email me at joshmichael@umbc.edu for a full tracked-changes version).

House members were receptive to comments, and Delegate Craig Rice is willing to carve up the bill to avoid the explained unintended consequences.

The Diamondback covered the event, highlighting the potential increased costs for students, resulting from the proscriptive language.  An editorial  was also published today.

Board of Regents set to approve Textbook Policy

The Board of Regents will consider the proposed "Policy on Textbook Affordability Measures" at tomorrow's full Board meeting at Towson University.  The effort stems from the Textbook Affordability Summit held on November 24th by the USM.  The policy includes a number of provisions, that when coupled with the federal law addressing textbooks, will significantly decrease the cost for students.  

The policy ensures that:

• students recieve ISBN numbers and other information regarding textbook selections well in advance of the beginning of the semester to ensure that students can shop competitively outside the bookstore
• deadlines for book finalization are set prior to the conclusion of classes in order to maximize the book buy-back process
• best practices for faculty regarding new editions of textbooks and bundling
• faculty can allow students to purchase older editions of an assigned book of the content is of relevant educational content
• bookstores stock both unbundled and bundled versions of materials
• students have the opportunity to review the use of course materails through final course evaluations
• faculty are educated of the policy each semester.

While legislation has been proposed by state legislators to address the problem, I question how provisions in this bill could negatively impact students.  The bill generally reiterates, in a number of places, positive provisions included in the federal textbook bill and the USM policy.  Yet, additional costs will likely rise for students as additional red-tape and regulation is inserted in the textbook adoption process, in the form of increased cost of books at the campus bookstore.  Additionally, limitations and unnecessary burdens on faculty could limit and frustrate the work and academic freedom of faculty.

The policy should pass the Board of Regents tomorrow, and should provide a comprehensive and workable policy to help lower the cost of textbooks.

Textbooks hit the press, USM policy & state legislation

The USM textbook policy and state legislation have gotten a lot of newspaper coverage in recent days.  The Board of Regents Education Policy Committee considered the textbook policy on Monday, and state legislation had a hearing on Wednesday.

I have spoken out in support of the state legislation with amendments.  I have some concerns with the bill, because I think it overburdens the administrative function of the bookstore, to the point where student costs will rise whether textbooks are purchased at the bookstore or not.  Additionally, the USM policy and federal legislation address the pertinent issues that impact tuition affordability by increasing redtape (see sections C & D).

In the Examiner Article, a quote highlights my statement that I would prefer to purchase books at the campus bookstore, when prices are comparable.  The reason for this is that the revenues collected on top of the cost of the book help cover the personnel costs of the arduous process of selecting books, as well as to subsidize other costs in the university.  Profits made on textbooks purchased outside of the bookstore go to the pockets of private businesses and corporations.

In my view, the goal should not be to run campus bookstores out of business by adding significant amounts of red tape, but to lower the cost of assigned books and then providing students with the ISBN number so they can search outside the university for books when the costs are overpriced.

Examiner Article
Diamondback - USM Policy / Legislation  / Editorial
The Towson Towerlight

USM Textbook Policy to be passed

Chancellor Kirwan, USM staff, and the Board of Regents were very receptive to amendments to the textbook policy at yesterday's Education Policy Committee Meeting of the Board of Regents.  After some conversation, the Board agreed to adopt the policy in principle, with expectations for amendments in coming days.  The Board is set to vote on the policy at its February 13th meeting at Towson. (Copy of new draft / marked-up version).

The policy is quite timely, considering that the Senate's Education, Health, and Environmental Affairs Committee will review the textbook legislation (SB 183).  This legislation causes some concern, with possible undue burdens on bookstores and institutions, evenutally increasing costs for students.  I have draft testimony for your consideration--let me know what you think.

Also, see an article from The Diamondback on yesterday's meeting.

Board of Regents Considers Textbook Policy

The Board of Regents and the University System of Maryland sponsored a Textbook Affordability Summit in December.  The BOR's Effectiveness and Efficiency Workgroup, led by Regent David Nevins, took up the task and has since developed a draft policy for the USM.

The Education Policy Committee will meet today at UMCP to discuss the policy.  See a copy of the policy, with my proposed amendments outlined in red.  

At debate will be to what extent should the BOR mandate clauses, as opposed to make broad suggestions and guidelines.  The debate is rooted in two principles of delegation of authority: academic freedom for faculty and institutional autonomy.

The policy has significant implications, in light of pending state legislation (HB 85 / SB 183).  The System my very well be able to stymie state regulation if the policy is broad and strict enough to meet expectations of legislators.  At the same time, a strict policy may be opposed by institutional and faculty representatives.

Of note, the policy with my amendments includes regulations that:

- release textbooks selections by December 1 for Spring Semester and May 1 for the fall semesters (include ISBN, author, edition, publisher, copyright date, and title)

- ensure that faculty consider the price before assigning a book

- have faculty consider using the same textbook for multiple semesters in a row

- ensure professors only assign new editions when necessary, and have them list all editions that are acceptable for use

- encourage faculty to unbundle book selections

- permit students to access electronic versions of books

- encourage faculty to use online documents and resources in class

- encourage faculty to be judicious in selecting books

- outline the procedure for assigning "recommended" materials

- require the assignment of "integrated" textbooks to be approved by Provosts

- include the use of textbooks as a measure for course evaluations

Ice storm a sign of things to come??

I couldn't help but draw the connection this morning between this unusually heavy ice storm and the Governor's proposed tuition freeze.  Most of us were "frozen" out of our cars, buildings, and sidewalks.  Check out this picture of Annapolis frozen over (from The Sun).

The Governor continues to make it clear that he wants to hold the line on the tuition freeze.  Last night, he sent a note to supporters reiterating his intentions:

January 27, 2009

A Message from Governor O'Malley

Dear Friends,
Recently, we gathered to release the FY 2010 budget for the State of Maryland. The proposed budget closes a projected $2 billion shortfall due to the national recession and at the same time protects the progress we have made in improving public education, workforce investments and making college more affordable.
We are committed to ensuring that college is both affordable and accessible for anyone who is willing to work hard for a better future, which is why we are providing a fourth straight year of zero percent increase for in-state college tuition, expanding opportunities for higher education so our children will not have their college dreams deferred. This means that students entering Maryland's University System four years ago will graduate this year without their tuition ever having gone up.
Our investments in higher education are evidenced by the selection of four Maryland campuses among the nation's top 50 "Best value" public colleges by the Princeton Review: Towson University, Salisbury University, St. Mary's College of Maryland and the University of Maryland Baltimore County.
In our efforts to protect our higher education progress, we are proposing:

• To include $16.9 million in the FY2010 budget to continue the tuition freeze; and
• To continue the "tuition freeze" for in-state undergraduates at Maryland's public 4-year higher education institutions for a fourth consecutive year.

As a result of the commitment we have made together to higher education, the University System of Maryland (USM) will have gone from having the sixth highest tuition in the nation in 2004 to having the 18^th, according to an analysis of national public university tuition data. Working together, we can continue to ensure that tomorrow's workforce will benefit from the investments we are making today.
Martin O'Malley
Governor

If nothing else, I guess last night's freezing storm is simply a warning sign to those who are thinking about standing in the way...

Higher Ed's Corner of the State Budget

In the fall of 2007, many of us spent time lobbying state legislators and policymakers to establish the first ever dedicated funding source for higher education in the United States.  You may recall emails from the administration or SGA volunteers asking you to contact your legislators to lobby for increased funding for higher education.  And, a number of student leaders participated in a Higher Education Rally in Annapolis during the heart of the 2007 Special Session.  The vehicle for this funding was the Higher Education Investment Fund, or HEIF.

Specifically, the HEIF is funded through a half-percent increase in the corporate income tax.  It is estimated that the state could recieve upwards of $66.5 million this coming year from the fund, according to the 2009 Dept. of Legislative Services Fiscal Briefing.  Originally intended to "supplement" and not "supplant" current funding in higher education, it's unclear whether on not the fund actually brings more money to higher education.  Possibly the fund is more symbolic than anything else, suring up a mandate for higher education, albeit a small fraction of the state's usual support for higher education.

The original passage of HEIF had a sunset clause included for 2009, as an emergency valve if slots did not pass in November 2008.  Slots passed, and so the Governor has proposed to reauthorize the dedicated funding source.  It seems like the bill will pass the legislature.

The real question, though, is whether the HEIF will return to "supplemental" status, as opposed to "supplanting" status, if/when fiscal times looks better.

USMstudents Returns & Legislative Session Begins

Hi all.  I regret not writing for the past month, but am excited to get back in communication with you all.  With the Fall 2008 semester over and a new year and Spring 2009 semester ahead of us, we all have a lot to look forward to.

As I write, I am headed out the door to Annapolis for the official opening of the 2009 Session of the Maryland General Assembly.  The Session lasts 90 days.  This year's session will inevitably be crowded by the looming budget revenue shortfalls that have already impacted every part of state government.

For higher education, two major priorities will shadow most lobbying efforts.  First, affordability will be at the forefront of discussions at the intersection of state budget support and tuition rates.  Should the legislature choose to cut higher education significantly from the budget, the likely response will be a hefty tuition increase to offset the lost support.

The other major issue will be textbook regulation legislation.  Senator Pinsky will likely propose legislation similar to last year's Senate Bill 657 .  Some changes will be made to ensure that this bill passes this session.  Also, expect other changes at the institution level from the Textbook Affordability Summit held last month.

Other issues are expected to arise during the session that will affect higher education, such as tuition for undocumented immigrants and funding for capital projects.  I look forward to keeping in touch with you through USMstudents during the 2009 Legislative Session.

Rainy Days: Budget Shortfalls for Maryland

The state estimates today released that revenues will fall $432 million short this year (Letter from Board of Estimates), and could expand to $950 million next year (Baltimore Sun Article). The Board of Public Works plans to immediately put the breaks on a number of capital projects, many of which could affect you. In this fiscal year (2009 Capital Budget Draft), the University System of Maryland is slated to receive the second greatest amount of capital dollars, right behind public school construction, with a nearly $144 million allocation. The Governor has provided a response.

Also, check out the statement by Comptroller Peter Franchot.

Implications could be rough for higher education. First, capital projects could get hit, and later, we could suffer in the operating budget.

Report to the USM Student Council

The USM Student Council is set to meet Sunday September 7 at USM Headquarters. The meeting agenda includes:
- elections of 2008-2009 officers
- a legislative update from Andy Clark
- a presentation from Rachel Fauber of the Maryland Student Climate Coalition
- discussion of the Amethyst Initiative
- discussion of the Slots Referendum
- role of the USM Student Council

As the student regent, I provide a written report each month. Please review and your convenience and contact me with any questions you may have.