4 - The Michigan Daily - Wednesday, July 23, 1997
Edited and managed by ERIN MARSH JACK SCHILLACI
students at the 4 4 * Editor in Chief Editorial Page Editor
University of Michigan
420 Maynard Street / orjoitv oite Dail' edooial nor dAll other articl ee nd
Ann Arbor, MI 48109 c 7000ndo iro neeo orily reel 1w opinion of The I ichio oaily.

A1ll in all, last week was good for stu-
dents and faculty alike. The
University Board of Regents approved a
budget containing the lowest tuition
increase in more than 10 years. Perhaps of
more interest to future classes, the regents
approved measures conducive to building
and retaining excellence among the
University's academic units.
Details of the budget reveal an admin-
istration living up to promises made by
University President Lee Bollinger early
this year. When Bollinger arrived, he
promised to hold tuition increases near the
rate of inflation, implying that administra-
tive costs would be reined in. It seems that
he accomplished that in his first budget as
president.
Overall, the University's general fund
increased by nearly 4 percent, up $31.5
million to $828 million. In spite of this,
administrative spending remains basically
unchanged, only increasing by 0.62 per-
cent. Administrators and workers in
administrators' offices will still receive a

9bneficial stet
'97-'98 budget helps students, faculty

standard 3.5-percent raise - the money is
slated to come from a self-loan. The
University will withdraw the outlay from
its reserve fund, to be paid back within a
year. Even while controlling spending, the
plan avoids punishing administrative
employees by delivering them their cus-
tomary raises.
To returning students, the budget's cen-
terpiece is certainly the low, across-the-
board 2.9-percent increase in undergradu-
ate tuition rates. Such a small increase will
make students' fight to keep their bank
accounts in the black more feasible. In-
state engineering graduate students might
be especially elated after seeing their
tuition increase by a mere 0.3 percent.
However, the good news for students
does not end there. While the administra-

tion makes do with the same money as last
year, academic units will enjoy a 4.5-per-
cent raise - faculty members stand to
receive 3-4 percent in salary boosts. While
not substantially greater than last year, the
circumstances surrounding the raises are
different than before. Last year, the admin-
istration only budgeted enough for one-
third of the pay increase, leaving the acad-
emic units to fulfill the remainder from
their own purses. This year, standard cost-
of-living faculty raises are included in the
administration's calculations. Overall, the
University will benefit as the remaining
money becomes available to fund pro-
grams that may have been slighted in the
past, and to recruit and retain top-notch
instructors and researchers. In addition,
the budget sets aside $4 million to allow

Bol ingea r to sponnsor spSci fic academic
programAs, aidig the University's academ-
i mission.
As always, the silver lining does come
wth a cloud. Last year, the Univ ersj,
delivered an enormous 6.9-perc
increase to student-financial aid. A repet
performance would have been welcomed,
but instead there will be only a 3.16-per-
cent increase. A significant number of stu-
dents depend on financial aid to allow
them to attend the University.
Administrators should ensure that no qual-
ified students are forced to drop out due a
lack of available funds.
The University has delivered an impor-
tant gift to students in the form of a lg
tuition increase. By holding the increase
near inflation levels, it has taken a step
toward keeping college accessible for
future and current students. And by deliv-
ering money to allow academic units to
develop programs and professors, the
University has moved toward ensuring
continued academic excellence.

Relat'onshlp problems
'U' must examine faculty-business relations
T ast Wednesday, the University's chief University and the community. In addition
urologist, Dr. Joseph Oesterling, to providing significant financing for
resigned in response to allegations of major research projects, the relationship
financial improprieties and a request from between the University and businesses
the University. Such predicaments are have given it the opportunity to give back
unavoidable even under the highest level to the community, something the
of scrutiny. However, the incident brings University should continue. However, the
up serious questions that demand consid- relationships must enhance the
eration for reforming the existing faculty- University's reputation - possible con-
business relations policy so that the flicts of interest detract from it. The pre-
University can prevent such damage to its sent honor system requires trust between
reputation from occurring again. faculty and the University - a bond that
Documents have been brought to light faculty must not betray. If time and expe-
exposing Oesterling's activities of ques- rience demonstrate that they cannot, facul-
tionable ethics and financial misconduct ty should disclose their relationships with
- undisclosed outside business contracts, outside business interests so that any pos-
conflicts of interest, multiple billing of sible conflicts of interests can be dealt
expenditures, falsification of ledgers and with immediately.
misusing University resources. The University must thoroughly exam-
With his reputation and background, ine its policy governing faculty-business
Oesterling can easily continue his work in partnerships, at the same time ensuring
prostate cancer and patient care. that faculty are aware of existing policies
Oesterling, however, has not simply tar- and that the guidelines under which they
nished his own name. His actions cut may establish contacts with the business
much deeper - he jeopardized his depart- world are made clear. Department heads
ment's reputation and the University's in particular must comprehend the
integrity. The consequences of his wrong- University's requirements so that they
doing are shared with the entire University may help monitor their departments. Only
community. with a comprehensive system of checks
The University must maintain a strong can violations be detected before they
academic reputation to attract a diverse, pose a significant threat to the
qualified student body and recruit top- University's integrity.
notch faculty. Incidents like those involv- The University must not allow any fac-
ing Oesterling pose a serious threat to the ulty to tarnish its reputation and threaten
University's reputation - if someone as its academic community. If faculty mem-
far up the ranks as Oesterling could violate hers detate from professional ethics stan-
proeso I°YiId usfrs ogdds l isis h n st

 tthe de6
NEA supports community development
paintings, concerts, theatre productions the NEA presently supplies.
and touring exhibits are in trouble. The NEA's programs provide an invalu-
After last year's significant reduction to able tool to help communities become and
the National Endowment for the Arts' bud- remain strong and vibrant. They can also
get, the U.S. House slimly voted to cut off attract tourism, thus aiding cities' commer-
all funding to the NEA last week. The vote cial industries and making the commui v
signifies a serious threat to the nation's more conducive to economic growthJi
arts industry as the endowment supplies social change. Large cities often have the
considerable funding to arts programs infrastructure in place to support projects
across the country. The arts provide more in their communities, but that is usually not
than entertainment - they create a sense true for small communities unable to
of community that can help support social scrape enough money together to put on a
progress and development. The Senate community theatre production. Cutting off
should maintain funding to the NEA and NEA funding to such communities would
give communities the opportunity to be devastating to their residents' morale
enhance residents' lives through the arts. and economic base.
Last week's vote not only ended future The University could also lose out&
funding of the endowment, but also cut off important funding if the NEA shuts down.
$10 million in shutdown costs. One of the The Undergraduate Research
reasons for the shutdown is the support the Opportunities Program uses NEA funds as
NEA gives for controversial exhibits. part of its budget. If the funds disappear,
However, these exhibits represent only a some important opportunities for research
small portion of the endowment's diverse will likely follow suit, blocking students
palette of activities - a subjective evalua- from a unique educational opportunity.
tion of them by Congress should not be the The representatives' voting pattern
basis for blocking the NEA's funding. reveals a disturbing trend - the vote was
Sen. Spence Abraham (R-Mich.) stated heavily partisan with most Republicans
his belief that the agency needs to become voting for the NEA's shutdown. The -
a private entity, funded entirely by dona- should not be a partisan issue - they he Tp
tions. Doing so would negate one of the all communities and citizens and should
endowment's main objectives: Provide receive support from both sides of the
small communities with access to artistic political fence.
performances and exhibits they might not Many legislators view federal funding
otherwise have. If the NEA privatized, it of the arts as unnecessary. However, what
would have to compete with nunerous is needed is the results that the arts pro-
other prisi 'rt' orgon' lions foi 1 ted 1 ile: A toxg sen e of commnrly ad