“It’s a clear indication from (Romney’s) perspective that the university was too bold in its stance to support the law-school issue,” said Mr. Karam, of Tiverton, R.I., who is president and CEO of the First Bristol Corp., a development company in Fall River. “There was going to be payback on this issue, and ultimately there was…I think the trend of a strong independent board is really critical. If the reason I was not reappointed was that I stood up for the university and in this case the Dartmouth campus, so be it. We were clearly correct on this issue.”
Mr. Karam said that in 2003 Gov. Romney also pressed the board to fire then-UMass president William Bulger, which Mr. Karam and a majority of the board opposed. Mr. Karam, whose trustees’ term expired yesterday, had recently been elected as chairman of the board for a third straight year. He said he heard from Gov. Romney that he would not be reappointed to another five-year term….
Mr. Karam said Larry Boyle, the only board member Gov. Romney did reappoint, was against the merger between UMass Dartmouth and SNESL to create a public law school. All of the other board members not being reappointed favored the merger, he said.
UMASS Dartmouth lost a close ally, a member of the Board of Trustees who not only graduated from our school, but is native to the region. With the budget totally slashed over three or four years, (because tax rollbacks are such a great idea) UMASS has nearly, barely survived a Governor who doesn’t believe in the UMASS system (apparently, UMASS Worcester and Amherst deserve all the state cash). Consequently, my student fees have risen by more than $500 each year I’ve been at UMASS – way beyond the rate of inflation – and the quality of my education has gone downhill (it’s nearly impossible to get into classes nowadays because they’re so packed).
In spite of Beacon Hill, my University is a great school. We’re just the right size, have lots of choices over programs and hundreds of great professors. We’re also one of the major economic stimulants in the region – for every dollar invested in UMASS Dartmouth, the region gets $4. Furthermore, people who go to UMASS stay in Massachusetts. More importantly, people who go to UMASS Dartmouth often stay in the Southcoast – and the Southcoast needs every educated worker it can get. UMASS Dartmouth is the only major school in the region – without it, Fall River and New Bedford would be utterly dead (instead of merely struggling).
If Mitt Romney were to have his way, the South Coast would be a pathetic ghost town. The sad thing is, with the Mitt Romneys of the world, it nearly is.
themcasnet says
On one hand, Karam and the other board members were correct. They were right to push for the merger, but it is inappropriate for members of the UMass Board of Trustees to complain when the Governor brings the hammer down on them.
<
p>
Let me explain. First, the Boards are ‘the Governor’s animal’, meaning that if and when they don’t enforce any Governor’s will they should expect that they won’t be re-appointed – regardless of who the Governor is.
<
p>
And in spite of Mr. Karam’s years of service and dedication to UMass, and despite the fact that I agree with him on the issue of the law school, Karam is still part of a political culture at the University that has largely stood in the way of real, effective grassroots political organizing.
<
p>
UMass and the Board of Trustees could be a gigantic political force in this state, if organized effectively and correctly. There are a large number of us alums who would like to see that happen and who have tried to push the University in that direction. Regrettably, the administration(s) and the Board have often stood in the way of these initiatives because they do not want to have to answer to the grassroots constituencies.
<
p>
They have opted for more control locally over a larger state allocation that might have to be shared with the alums, students and faculty who mobilized and lobbied to help deliver that larger appropriation.
<
p>
If the U were a stronger political community, the Governor might not be willing to take on Karam. But alas, now the disempowerment of the community has come back to bite Karam in the ass – and he is just one more in a long line of University officials who have ultimately contributed to their own demise.
<
p>
They can’t have it both ways.
ryepower12 says
Here’s the problems that I have –
<
p>
There were 6 reappointments that happened all at once. Mitt Romney was able to sweep out the element in the University that actually supported the University. Here’s a fact: Mitt Romney DOES NOT support any UMASS beside Amherst and Worcester. He’s said it before, if it were up to him there’d only be two UMASSes.
<
p>
What should be the case is there should be 1-2 reappointments each year, so there’s never 6 or 7 all at once. It wouldn’t be a hard task and would ensure that you couldn’t have a clean sweep in just a year or two.
<
p>
Furthermore, more than just the governor deserves a say. Currently, the only appointees not selected by the governor are single-year appointees who are UMASS students. There needs to be further insulation of the system so it can grow more politically relevant as you suggest.
<
p>
Standing up to the Governor on the merger was everything you wanted and more – and what happened? They were all sacked. Furthermore, the replacements will be no friend to the UMASS system – you can be assured of that. I know how boards work, having been very close to the Board of Ed. for a number of years, and there are frequent selections who are no friend to the organization they’re supposed to represent.
<
p>
UMASS Dartmouth and the South Coast community desperately need that law school. While it needs to be improved, just some minor investments will turn out qualified lawyers often working in the public sector for the state of Massachusetts. The effects of the law school would be enormous, it would be a boon to the community, it would create more lawyers who are qualified prosecutors, state defendents, etc. The Governor can’t have his own way on this matter, especially since the State of Massachusetts is very likely hugely against him on the position.
frankskeffington says
…but certainly not on the cuts in the UMass budget and the skyrocketing costs for the only affordable means to get a college education nowadays.
<
p>
As an Alum of UMass (yes, from one of those resource sucking campuses) I was embarrassed that Bill Bulger was President of UMass and stopped giving money while he was President. If I were Governor, I would not reappoint a Trustee that thought it was OK for a University President to take the 5th before a Congressional Committee, or side with a serial killer brother instead of basic human decency and the rule of law.
<
p>
As for a Law School, that has been debated and angled for since the 60s. As someone who thinks there are enough lawyers in the world and certainly enough law schools around the general area, I thought it was a bad idea. Especially because it would have sucked up resources that would be better used to beef up the undergrad programs or pay the faculty the pay raise the contract promised.
<
p>
I’m sure it would have improved the reputation of UMass Dartmouth and would have added jobs to the area, but those are not big picture needs. That is pork barrel.
<
p>
And now that I just threw that bomb, I’m logging off and going out for the evening.
gary says
frankskeffington says
that public higher ed should be affordable for folks to afford to go to college and not have to pay private college tuition?
gary says
At $9K per year, with the average student leaving with an average of $16K in debt, it’s affordable, no?
alexwill says
Pleading the Fifth is a crime now?
gary says
Simply, that it was a policy reason for non-appointment.
alexwill says
i know he didn’t say it was a crime, i was exagerrating… but i still never understand when people are attacked for acting on their constitutional rights. it’s pretty ridiculous reason to judge someone in whatever context.
frankskeffington says
…being the President of the State University System, making $300,000 plus in public money andexcerising his constutional right against self-incrimination about a mass murderer. Private citizen, fine. But if Bulger wants to flaunt public responsiblity and help a killer, let’s not have him in a position of civic leadership and kick his ass out. That was the right thing to do and if those Trustee’s can’t understand that, they shuoldn’t be there.
gary says
It’s a constitutional right and all that, but if an employee of mine pleads the 5th, I’ll justifiably consider whether or not to continue my affiliation with him or her. Call me narrow-minded.
ryepower12 says
I’m not going to argue Bulger’s case, because that’s something that I consider as irrelevant as John Bonet Ramsey.
<
p>
However, the Law School would be cheap to buy and would provide everyone an opportunity. You just don’t get that not everyone can afford 30-40k a year for law school, do you? That’s outrageous.
<
p>
The South Coast is in desperate need and it wouldn’t have cost taxpayers a dime The University had the funds to buy the law school outright, it only needed permission to spend it. We could have gotten that law school for under 20 million dollars… which is less than the cost of some new buildings.
<
p>
You, sir, are BLIND if you don’t think this is a “big picture” issue. That’s just astoundingly dumb. It doesn’t get anymore big picture than providing equal opportunity and affordable education, especially in fields that only the rich can persue because they’re so friggin expensive to get the degrees (and there’s almost no grants available because it’s considered a ‘high wage earning field’ despite the fact that a lot of law fields don’t pay well, like PUblic Law, which just happens to be this law school’s specialty!!).
gary says
I hear that all the time.
themcasnet says
But I love your screen name…one of my all-time favorite books.
<
p>
Massachusetts is one of only two states in the entire country that does not have a public law school. I think the other one is Delaware. And the only reason we don’t is that the private school cabal always has always been successful in advancing the “we have too many already” talking points propaganda.
<
p>
As for affordability, UMass has and will continue to be one of the most expensive public universities in the country as long as it continues to rely exclusively on an “inside-game” strategy, whereby the trustees and the President do all of the lobbying (and thus have total control of the budget)on Beacon Hill.
<
p>
The University needs a grassroots organizing strategy to increase it’s public profile and ultimately it’s political clout. It also needs to do more to encourage and foster grassroots a permanent statewide legislative base by organizing the massive constituencies (ie. alums, parents, faculty and staff) to lobby on behalf of the annual budget request.
<
p>
If that kind of political clout had been in place prior to this round of house-cleaning, it is unlikely that Romney would have: a. blocked the purchase of the law school, or; b. – retaliated vs. the pro-bulger folks.
<
p>
But alas, some of the same trustees who have prevented that kind of grassroots participation have now been sunk by the University community’s lack of political clout.
<
p>
frankskeffington says
At times I’ve been part of the embryonic “grass roots” network supporting UMass, so I agree it needs to happen to advocate for a quality and accessible system of public higher education. But the hiring of Bill Bulger was the ultimate of the ‘”inside-game” strategy’ you deplore.
<
p>
Defending Bulger at UMass is like well defending someone who defends a mass murderer. All black and white to me, I dont care how much good he did for the University. And Im glad anyone who defended Bulger did not get reappointed. As for me being suckered by the cabal of private schools undermining all levels of public higher ed…I guess my personal belief that our society has too many lawyers aligns me temporarily with these dogs. The enemy of my enemy is my friend.