4 - The Michigan Daily - Wednesday, May 22, 1996 Edited and managed by ERIN MARSH students at the Editor in Chief PAUL SERILLA 42NanrdSreIaI Q EioriLhe Opinion Page Editors * ; I University of Michigan tpinxon Page Editors A2 Maynar d street lTitiLtf ote ai.l edini l( bar11' thOer articles.,let teruand A nn Arbor, M 48109 c ""'" I'""""o nec'ssrh ele h ?irat(fTheMcit~iy T here should be little doubt that a multi-billion dollar entity such as the University is a sort of corporation. Its lat- est budgetary move - to the new Value- Centered Management plan - fits in with that concept. Slated for a July 1 imple- mentation, VCM calls for a plan of decen- tralization that, in theory, should lead to a University far more responsive to the needs and concerns of its students and fac- ulty. But as the plan may be well-inten- tioned, many concerns exist with the prac- tical effects of the new system. Traditionally, the central administration has collected most monies entering University coffers - including tuition dollars - before redistributing the funds to different schools. Under VCM, certain funds, like tuition, would go directly to various schools, like LSA and Engineering. This represents a potential hazard for smaller academic units, such as the School of Public Policy, which has a far smaller enrollment than does LSA. Where smaller schools could once be sure of certain funding from a central source, they could be squeezed out by larger, more populous academic units when it comes to funding by numbers under VCM. Newanagedment Plan encourages increased responsibility At the same time, other funds - including state appropriations - will con- tinue to be handled and rerouted through a single source. The provost's office will receive and process money from the state. The funds, as part of a "Provost's Allocation," will be awarded to schools by an incentive-based system, with emphasis on "the highest priorities of the University." While the University has pledged that it will allow no school or program to go without sufficient funding, it has not pro- posed a specific system of safeguards to ensure the University's pledge will be a reality of VCM. While it can be inferred that the University's central administration will be monitoring the separate schools' funding requests, the vague pledge must be solidified. No program should be washed away in the tide of incentives and competition for funds. The incentive plan could have both pos- itive and negative effects. If the competi- tion for money leads to the development of worthwhile new programs, the new system will have succeeded. However, if the com- petition turns acrimonious, and leads to reduced cooperation among the academic units, the results could be disastrous for students and faculty. Another significant component of VCM is the redistribution of costs from the central administration to individual schools. While schools will now receive tuition funds directly, they will also be expected to shoulder certain costs for- merly centrally funded, including high- profile programs like the Department of Public Safety, ITD and the Museum of Art. Once again, by making individual schools pay, VCM's goal is to increase the schools' responsibility for these pro- grams. However, more important than the fate of the larger units is that of the students within the University commun ty. A major goal of VCM is to reduce the number of bureaucratic layers between students' tuition money and the money actually used to educate them. In theory, the new changes would create a system more open and responsive to the needs of its students. However, some fear that the layer or two of bureaucracy removed from the central administration will be replaced by multiple layers in each school. In the end, students could be leo as far or farther away from the budgetary process as they are in the current system. Many possible outcomes exist for VCM. In the best case scenario, the result is a University that treats its students like respected stockholders in a corporation, responsive to their needs and requests. On the other hand, it could lead to a University that treats its students - its paying cus- tomers - as mere revenue sources. To University must take care that education does not fall victim to economics under VCM. Protecting matrimony State should respect same-sex marriages A s the state of Hawaii moves closer to legalizing same-sex marriages, the state of Michigan is moving farther away from supporting its gay and lesbian population. The proposal designed to prevent recognition of gay marriages outside of Michigan unanimously passed in the state Senate Local, Urban and State Affairs Committee by a margin of 3-0. The full Senate will eventually vote on the proposal and there is a simi- lar package being considered in the House. State Sen. William Van Regenmorter (R-Jenison) sponsored the bill to protect "the basic unit of family" and "the traditional marriage of one man and one woman." Regenmorter's "family values" belief is indicative of the direction that many American politicians are taking by attempting to legislate morality. It is clearly an example of pub- lic lawmakers interfering in the private lives of their constituents. By refusing to recog- nize the the legal status of homosexual marriages, the state is denying these unions many of the benefits most consider basic to the institution. Nationally, the issue of same-sex marriages is becoming highly political. President Clinton, perhaps attempting to avoid damaging repercussions similar to those surround- ing the issue of gays in the military, has wavered on the subject. Clinton has had a long- standing opposition to homosexual marriages -he claims that he does not wish to divert his energies from strengthening the nuclear family. Yet he has fallen short of officially supporting Sen. Bob Dole's (R-Kansas) bill forbidding federal recognition of states' same-sex marriage laws. Nevertheless, Clinton appears to be catering to the right on the issue of "family values" by hinting he would sign the bill if it passes in Congress, there- by institutionalizing marriage as a union solely between man and woman. There are clear fundamental inconsistencies involved in this issue. First, Michigan appears to be inching toward violating the Constitution. By refusing to recognize a homosexual marriage officiated in another state, such as Hawaii, Michigan would con- tradict the "full faith and credit" provision. According to this constitutional law, citizens traveling from one state to another must be recognized in the same way - marriage sta- tus included. Second, marriage laws have traditionally fallen under states' jurisdiction. By attempting to define who can and cannot marry, the federal government is blatantly interfering in states' rights. It is clear that the fundamental issues of human dignity and appreciation of differ- ences are at stake. The law has traditionally treated marriage with respect. By passing such a statute, this country would be regressing to an age where the law restricted mar- riages on the basis of factors such as race and religion. Many in the gay and lesbian com- munities view same-sex marriage as one of the most important ways of maintaining sta- ble and monogamous relationships. For the U.S. Government - and particularly the state of Michigan - to deny this freedom is deplorable. Engler fails students Governor's plan attacks adult education Governor John Engler's education agenda has been irresponsible and reprehensible at a levels of learning - cuts in K-12 per-pupil funding for primary education, hundreds of millions of dollars of cuts in adult education programs, and pitting universities against one another for dwindling state funding. Recently, adult education has once again come under attack. Engler has announced his plans for changing the program - including requiring many adult education students to pay tuition. His intentions are misguided and should be halted. Since taking office in 1990, Engler has been ruthless in his attacks on adult educa- tion. He has cut state spending on the program from $375 million in 1991 to its current $185 million. He has proposed cutting another one-third of that for the coming year. But his proposals go much deeper than simply cutting funding. Engler has proposed that free public education be available to all citizens through age 20. Currently, there is no age limit on students in the programs that are run through local school districts. For students over 20, only those who obtain a recommendation from their employers would be eligible to receive a tax-paid education. Adult education would continue to be available from school districts, but those districts would have to charge tuition for those who have not obtained a recommendation. In his continuing efforts to undermine public schools by pitting them against private schools, vocational training program funding - an integral element of the adult education program - would be available from the Michigan Jobs Commission. Admission would be determined by a competitive application process open to both public schools and for-prof- it private schools. Basic education would still be offered through the school districts. There are many problems with Engler's proposals. First, by instituting the tuition requi* ment, Engler is limiting access to a program desperately needed by its users. According to the Michigan Association of Community and Adult Education, restricting free education to those under age 20 would eliminate 70 percent of the current enrollment in adult education. Forty percent of beginning adult education students have skills below the eighth-grade level. Many students live at or under the poverty level. Pursuing an education provides these students the opportunity to improve not only their minds, but also the standard of living for their families. Engler says the existing system has failed to produce positive results. However, limiting its access is not going to solve the problem. Engler blames the program for being wasteful and spending money on the same students students repeatedly. But that is far from the truth. "Adult education isn't really a second chance" said Karen Katz, executive director of MACAE. "* a continuation of their first chance. When they dropped out, they never had another penny spent on them. Now they're just getting their late payment. It's not a double dip." Adult education is an important program, giving a second chance to those who des- perately need it. In a time when an education is a basic necessity for economic survival, Engler should not limit its access.