MSU to Conference USA?

[DoubleJayAlum]

You never get to vote?

On thing you've convinced me of: your reading comprehension sucks. I never said I "never get to vote." I said, "I never get to directly vote on the issue of funding state schools."

[Aargh]

This includes total subsidies which include student fees, direct and indirect institutional support, and direct state support.

My discussion was totally about direct state support. WSU's athletic department gets money from student fees. That amount is voted on by the students. States are in bad financial shape right now and politicians are doing everything possible to create the appearance they are cutting unnecessary money from state budgets. Students aren't under that type of public pressure and what they pay is essentially voluntary.

There's a huge difference between what I was discussing and the figures presented to refute my point.

[Khan4Cats]

You never get to vote?

On thing you've convinced me of: your reading comprehension sucks. I never said I "never get to vote." I said, "I never get to directly vote on the issue of funding state schools."

My reading comprehension skills are just fine. If you want merely a direct literal translation of what you wrote, then yes, you do not get to vote directly on anything. Neither do 99.9% of the citizens of this country since we have a representative repulican form of government. So to carry your premise to it's logical conclusion, since you 'do not directly vote on' anything and therefore, by implication, have no say in those decisions, you also have no say in tax policy, foreign policy, judicial appointments, and so on and so forth. After all, you do not vote DIRECTLY on any of those. An informed and active citizen can have a great impact, of course most Americans are too lazy to think they have any say whatsoever-since they don't vote directly on anything. Be what you wish.

[Khan4Cats]

This includes total subsidies which include student fees, direct and indirect institutional support, and direct state support.

My discussion was totally about direct state support. WSU's athletic department gets money from student fees. That amount is voted on by the students. States are in bad financial shape right now and politicians are doing everything possible to create the appearance they are cutting unnecessary money from state budgets. Students aren't under that type of public pressure and what they pay is essentially voluntary.

There's a huge difference between what I was discussing and the figures presented to refute my point.

Okay, than please cite your source that indicates solely "direct state support".

The indystar database shows $0 (zero) in total government support.

Where does your number come from? If it includes 'direct institutional support', then UNI is not alone in receiving those funds either (hint: WSU does, too) which would, in fact, refute your original claim that UNI is the ONLY school in the conference relying on state funds.

As I showed by the most recent numbers available through USA Today-all of the public institutions in the conference are receiving some form of subsidy.

And yes, students vote on fees or at least the student senate may. BUT, once instituted, they don't re-vote. They are there and paid unless there is a later vote to repeal, it is not something that gets voted on every year. A student coming to campus today has no say on fees that may have been voted on 10 or 20 years ago unless they start a petition to repeal those fees.

[unipanther99]

From the actual report last year to the Iowa Board of Regents:

There are three typical funding models in Division I athletics. In one model, the department
generates 100 percent of its revenue. Even in this model, there is ordinarily some student fee
component to their revenue stream. Another model, similar to UNI's structure, has a modest
student fee component, while providing significant support from the general education fund.
The third model relies heavily on student fees to support the operating budget, with modest or
no general education fund dollars.
In the Missouri Valley Conference, examples of two of the different support models exist. Illinois
State, Southern Illinois and Indiana State each support their departments with over $5 million in
student fees annually, with less than $2 million in general education fund support. Missouri
State and Northern Iowa rely on heavier support from the general education fund with less than
$1.5 million in student fees.

http://www.regents.iowa.gov/Meetings/Do ... ITEM11.pdf

The money has to come from somewhere. How you shuffle it around and report it ends up being an accounting game.

And also from the state report:

Eliminating university general fund support of intercollegiate athletics would terminate Division I
athletics at UNI, and most likely intercollegiate athletics at any level at UNI.

I believe that statement to be true for the vast majority of NCAA schools.

[valleychamp]

From the MSU article:

"Almost all programs (athletically or academically) at a university lose money," Elliott said. "That's why we have state funding for almost 50 percent of our total budget.

"A subsidy for athletics is not different than for any program."

Athletics has an $11.6 million budget for 2011-12, up $400,000 from the year before, with $5.1 million due to be transferred from the general operating fund, a $100,000 increase from 2010-11.

Is money from the "general operating fund" not direct support from the state?

[DoubleJayAlum]

You never get to vote?

On thing you've convinced me of: your reading comprehension sucks. I never said I "never get to vote." I said, "I never get to directly vote on the issue of funding state schools."

My reading comprehension skills are just fine. If you want merely a direct literal translation of what you wrote, then yes, you do not get to vote directly on anything. Neither do 99.9% of the citizens of this country since we have a representative repulican form of government. So to carry your premise to it's logical conclusion, since you 'do not directly vote on' anything and therefore, by implication, have no say in those decisions, you also have no say in tax policy, foreign policy, judicial appointments, and so on and so forth. After all, you do not vote DIRECTLY on any of those. An informed and active citizen can have a great impact, of course most Americans are too lazy to think they have any say whatsoever-since they don't vote directly on anything. Be what you wish.

Well, I don't how it works in Iowa, but here in Nebraska, I regularly get to vote on various bond issues and similar referenda. Since you don't seem to have any idea how bond issues work, let me provide you with a civics lesson. A spending issues is placed on the ballot, specifically setting forth how much is to be spent/borrowed and and description of what the money will be spend on is provided. I honestly can't remember the last election where the wasn't a bond issue of some sort on the ballot.

[panther-state]

and those gosh darn unicameral systems of government.

[Khan4Cats]

From the MSU article:

"Almost all programs (athletically or academically) at a university lose money," Elliott said. "That's why we have state funding for almost 50 percent of our total budget.

"A subsidy for athletics is not different than for any program."

Athletics has an $11.6 million budget for 2011-12, up $400,000 from the year before, with $5.1 million due to be transferred from the general operating fund, a $100,000 increase from 2010-11.

Is money from the "general operating fund" not direct support from the state?

For a lot of the general fund, yes it comes from the state, but not all. Tuition, grants, gifts, interest from investments (land holdings, patents,...), merchandise sales, etc. etc. all go can go into the general fund. Schools could try and play shell games and paraphrase how the federal government does things like "we're not giving private schools money for religious education, we're providing money for healthy meals or technology or transportation..." and say we aren't using tax money for sports, it's covering the costs of room and board for the athletes, or the electrical bills for the scoreboards, or technology.... but no one would buy that as easily.

Very few athletic programs are self-sustaining. At least of the public schools that release records. Can't make that blanket statement for private schools since most won't release detailed records, but I would guess that there is still some kind of subsidy from the general fund for a lot/most of those schools too.