Fair and Breezy, 50.0°
Log in ·
Bob, I have nothing against KSU, but according to the Fulbright Website (https://us.fulbrightonline.org/top-pr...) in 2016-17 KU had 4 Fulbright Scholars and KSU had one.
Posted 7 October 2017, 7:03 p.m.
I was particularly intrigued by the following quote, "Sullivan said the $317 million loan would be repaid over the next seven years with payments of about $45 million a year." Given that 7 times $45 million = $315 million that is one heck of a loan deal the state is expecting in order to balance the budget.
Posted 11 January 2017, 1:42 p.m.
If your concern is cost you are on the wrong side of the argument. The majority of studies indicate it is less expensive to incarcerate someone for life without chance of parole than to execute them.
Add to that the more than 151 people condemned to death and later proven innocent.
Posted 11 June 2016, 2:12 p.m.
Posted 13 May 2016, 4:40 p.m.
Apologies to Pittsburg on the misspelling!
Posted 11 May 2016, 9:58 p.m.
No assumptions made. Just clarifying the difference between the base used for the cuts.
Posted 11 May 2016, 9:57 p.m.
I could be wrong, but I do not think this issue has been explained clearly. All numbers are made up in this example, but the general principle holds.
Let's say KU gets $1,000,000 from the state of Kansas and $200,000 in research grants from any of variety of funding agencies. The legislature says they want to take a 3% cut of the $1.2 million, or $36,000. The agreements with the research funding agencies do not legally allow any reallocation of the monies they provide, so KU has to cut all $36,000 from the support of the education of students. That is, the percentage cut from student education is 3.6%
Meanwhile Pittsburgh gets $500,000 from the state of Kansas and has no research funding. Their 3% cut is $15,000, but is a true 3% cut.
Moreover, this approach sets a precedent that penalizes KU and K-State and any other public Kansas university that strives for excellence in research. The more success you have in bringing in research dollars, the more your educational programs are penalized. This is particularly problematic given the strong evidence that research productivity translates into economic benefit (start-up companies, jobs, etc.) and so this approach penalizes one of the most powerful economic engines in the state.
Posted 11 May 2016, 2:28 p.m.
Impressive. The legislature managed to find as their sole speaker an assistant professor (lowest rank of professor) from a third rate university in another state (University of Wisconsin - Oshkosh) to tell them what they wanted to hear.
Posted 18 February 2016, 2:25 p.m.
If Arpke showed up for work maybe he would have a better idea of what was going on. http://www.salina.com/news/arpke-crit...
Posted 8 February 2016, 6:25 p.m.
It's time: http://ballotpedia.org/Article_4,_Kan...
Posted 4 June 2015, 4:47 p.m.
Full LJWorld.com site
© 2017 LJWorld.com