Support University of Alabama or not - Bama Blitz

It does seem to be a bit ironic that the University of Alabama is promoting the Bama Blitz initiative while recent news headlines address tuition hikes, University Blvd. improvements and coaches’ salaries.  Through emails, billboards and a website, Bama Blitz is providing all who wish to participate 1 day, 8 hours and 31 minutes beginning at noon on April 11th and ending at 8:31 PM on April 12th, to make their commitments. The Bama Blitz description states that it is: “An inspiring online fundraising event for alumni, faculty, staff, students and friends to come together and support The University of Alabama.”  It is certainly a noble cause to encourage individuals to support the university, but the irony comes to the fore when there seems to be no shortage of fiscal resources when administrators and the Board of Trustees decide to spend, spend, spend.

Let’s consider just a few issues that contribute to the irony.  Please do keep in mind that we are talking about a university that is in a state where the median income is a little over $40,000 a year and is ranked in the lower quarter of the 50 states.  Recent information from the Chronicle on Higher Education stated the salary and benefits enjoyed by the university president, Stuart Bell, exceeded $700,000.  This salary was the third highest in the SEC, behind Vanderbilt and Texas A & M.  The number of administrators and faculty who have salaries exceeding $100,000 a year has increased significantly over the past several years.  The cost of tuition has increased by plus 40 percent over the past 10 years while the rate of inflation has averaged less that 2 percent for the same period.  The percentage of non-residents of Alabama enrolling as freshman, has continued to increase to the point where these students exceed the number of Alabama citizens at the university. 

Now, it is in this context that the university is imploring alumni, faculty, staff, students and others to give their fiscal support to the university.  There is no argument that there have been positive gains over the past 10 plus years.  The number of Merit Scholars has seen a dramatic increase, the overall quality of students is higher and faculty and staff salaries which were, woefully, out of step with similar institutions warranted increase.  It is not that there have been no positive gains, but there have also been questionable decisions by the Board and campus administrators.  In one of the poorest states in the country, how can a compensation package of over $700,000 for the university president be justified?  How can the addition of more administrators at salaries exceeding $200,000 and $300,000 be acceptable?  How can we continue to admit more non-Alabama students than residents of the state, year-after-year? 

Whether to participate in the Bama Blitz will be a decision everyone will need to make; however, there is also responsibility that rests with the Board and campus administrators to act in a more efficient and defensible manner.  Those in positions of power should be cognizant of what is acceptable to the alumni, faculty, staff, students and friends if they want to garner the support that is being requested.

Why Now

I have been asked, why go to the trouble of having a Blog at this point in your life.  Well, I guess, that’s a reasonable question.   I am comfortable, have a decent retirement, have a very good family life, including a supportive wife and kids who have done well with their lives.   Have had a professional career that has had a measure of success.  Indeed, I have the requisite aches and pains.  We all seem to have a cross to bear and I, certainly, have mine; however, I remain on the green side of the grass.

The initial post, One More Shooting is One Too Many, was an op-ed article that was submitted to the local newspaper, The Tuscaloosa News, shortly after the tragedy in Parkland, Florida, and they did not print it.  Obviously, there were no reasons given, but this experience mirrored other experiences in recent months with this news outlet.  Given the absence of a means for sharing opinions, thoughts, concerns and suggestions on a variety of issues I decided to have the Blog developed.   In the future, I will be posting articles about relevant and current subjects.  There is a myriad of topics that lend themselves to a variety of perspectives, including, the safety of children in schools across the county; the local, state and national political arenas; the ever-changing environment in Washington with the present administration; the intrusion of technology into our lives; and, pending cases before the Supreme Court, to mention just a few examples.  There will also be opportunities that arise due to a current event.

Considering my background in higher education, some of what I will be sharing will be specific to this venue.  It is my belief that there are several issues in higher education that require some scrutiny and discussion.  Examples include, salaries of administrators, faculty and staff; the level of productivity of faculty; the reliance on out-of-state students at public universities to bolster the financial coffers; the astronomical amount of debt that so many students incur and the impact this can have on their future; the for-profit programs that have arisen and modified the educational landscape; the overuse of the Internet to teach classes at the expense of face-to-face communication; and, the lack of personal interaction between faculty and students.

I do hope that you will be willing to indulge me and consider what I include in the ensuing days.  I know that what I include will not resonate with all who might read a specific post and “Flying with the Crow” will offer you the opportunity to comment.  Please take the time to send me your comments.  I welcome you to do so.

One more shooting is one too many

The tragedy of the horrific and senseless school shooting that occurred in Parkland, Florida last week is that nothing different will be done.  Those advocating for ownership of guns will argue that guns don’t kill, people do”.  These same advocates will point to the 2nd Amendment and further argue that it guarantees people the right to “keep and bear arms.  In a recent article in the Alabama Political Reporter , Josh Moon wrote a very poignant article about the absurdity of this argument.  His article, entitled, “Your pro-gun arguments are stupid”, pointed out that these same pro-gun proponents fail to include the first part of the sentence in the 2nd Amendment which reads: “A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free state,…” as they beat the drum for gun ownership.  It would appear that the right to keep and bear arms was related, specifically, to a well-regulated Militia.  States have the National Guards, local and state law enforcement to provide for this protection,

Let it be stated, that those of us who have serious reservations about the proliferation of guns in our country are not arguing that guns cannot be owned by the citizenry.  What is of concern is the type of gun.  Pistols for individual protection, rifles and shotguns for hunting are not the problem.  The problem is the assault rifles and weapons of destruction that can fire rapid rounds of ammunition in milliseconds.  Why are these weapons needed?  How does restricting ownership of such weapons undermine the 2nd Amendment?  How are these weapons used other than for mass shootings?  It is my recollection that in each of the school shootings and recent massacres, such as Las Vegas, it was this type of weapon that was used.

As noted earlier, the tragedy that words of condolence will be forthcoming, individuals will point out how something must be done, yet politicians will send their “thoughts and prayers” and go about their other business.  Following the Sandy Hook massacre in 2012, the Connecticut Legislature did act and passed some of the most stringent gun-control legislation in the county.  In a recent article in The New York Times, data from the Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, stated that: “with few exceptions, states with the strictest gun-control measures, California, Connecticut, New Jersey and New York, have the lowest rates of gun deaths, while those with the most lax laws, Alabama, Alaska and Louisiana, have the highest.” It would certainly appear that there is some correlation between the laws and the results.

Let us hope that politicians in Washington and the state capitols around the country will have the backbone and the fortitude to do what needs to be done.  Short of this we will just be waiting for the next Parkland, Sandy Hook or Columbine to happen.  Listen to the Parkland students, they are begging for action, not words.