This definitely makes me feel safe

First Brittany Zimmerman, now this (from the BH). I don’t know what this means for Mifflin, if anything, but it can’t be good considering the proximity.

I wonder if/when the campus wide email about this will come out. I haven’t gotten one yet.

Edit: Fortunately, no one was killed this time and at least they know who did it.

Ald. Mike Verveer, District 4, confirmed that the victim of the shooting was shot by someone he or she knows. The victim’s injuries are not life threatening.

Verveer added the police are certain who the suspect is and are on the lookout for the individual.

Edit: DC article, WSJ, Capital Times

The Next UW Chancellor?

Probably not, but University of Idaho President Tim White announced he is considering taking a “leadership position” at another university. However, it does sound like he has the right experience for our current situation.

White took over at U of I during one of the university’s darkest periods. The schools finances were bleak.

The University of Idaho is just a third tier school, so coming to UW would definitely be an upgrade.

DC Editorial Board piece shows clear lack of research and understanding of the issue at hand

Normally, I don’t have the luxury of having the time to do any kind of fact checking and research of the campus papers, but special circumstances and information from an inside source made this DC Editorial Board piece an exception. To make a statement like this shows a total lack of research and understanding of any part of the issue

The case pits religious beliefs against professional duties: Noesen maintains that he should not be obligated to dispense medications prohibited by his religion, arguing that this violates his state constitutional rights, or “right of conscience,” to religiously oppose birth control.

The state Pharmacy Examining Board, Barron County Circuit Court and 3rd District Court of Appeals disagree. In March, the appellate court affirmed the legality of the board’s ruling to limit Noesen’s license and require him to take an ethics course.

and then later this flat out lie

Noesen’s decision was reckless and unlawful. Wisconsin law prohibits pharmacists from refusing treatment on moral grounds. As the appellate ruling aptly noted, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that one’s religious beliefs do not exempt compliance with otherwise valid laws forbidding conduct that is within the state’s legal purview.

In fact the state constitution makes it very clear in Section 253.09 (3) that he indeed does have a right to religiously oppose distributing birth control.

3) No hospital, school or employer may discriminate against any person with regard to admission, hiring or firing, tenure, term, condition or privilege of employment, student status or staff on the ground that the person refuses to recommend, aid or perform procedures for sterilization or the removal of a human embryo or fetus, if the refusal is based on religious or moral precepts.

I really don’t know what it would take to make it any more clear than that. The guy should lose his case, but for entirely different reasons than the DC cites. The basic research isn’t that hard to do. The first news result when one searches “Noesen” in Google News other than the Daily Cardinal piece is this Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel piece which makes pretty clear the case against him.

The Wisconsin Department of Regulation and Licensing’s Pharmacy Examining Board upheld a finding by an administrative law judge that he violated standards of care required in the profession by not providing her with an alternative means of getting her medication.

This Christian Post piece makes it pretty clear in the first sentence the reason he was disciplined. And if they perhaps wanted to do some first hand research of their own, the actual decision of the Appellate Court is the first thing returned by a Google Search of the name of the case “Noesen v. State of Wisconsin Department of Regulation & Licensing, Pharmacy Examining Board.” It’s not like it’s written in legalese either, its pretty easy to read and understand. Reading the decision of someone who agrees with you and whose job it is to form opinions on such matters before you write your own might be a good idea.

Noesen was well within his right to refuse to fill her prescription for religious reasons. It was his refusal to refer her to someone who would that merited his reprimand.

The difference in this case might initially seem pretty trivial, but the entire purpose of the editorial was to argue that the decision of the courts up to this point has been correct. When you blatantly make up provisions in Wisconsin law that don’t exist and use them as the basis on which to write your opinion piece, that’s a pretty big deal. It also is such an important issue that could potentially hit close to home for so many students. To give so many female students such skewed perceptions of the rights of those responsible for administering their contraceptives could potentially risk a situation similar to what the woman who was denied her prescription went through where she had to miss taking her prescription.

This reminds me of criticism we’ve heard before and might just be that example of a more controversial item.

[Edit] The BH opinion piece today on the same topic didn’t do any better.

As the law stands, contraceptives are legal, and at pharmacies that sell contraceptives, a pharmacist is expected to fill prescriptions for them. So, what is a pharmacist to do if he or she has a moral objection to contraceptives? How about this novel solution: Don’t work at a pharmacy that sells contraceptives. Or, at the very least, a pharmacist should inform his employers of his objections so the situation can be appropriately accommodated.

He too didn’t do the proper research into the state law. Not to mention the fact that Noesen did detail his objections to dispensing birth control pills, as detailed in the Appellate Courts decision, paragraph 4:

In July 2002, RPh assigned Noesen to the K-Mart pharmacies in
Menomonie and Rhinelander. On July 2, 2002, Noesen sent a letter via e-mail to John Scott at RPh, detailing Noesen’s conscientious objections. As relevant to this case, Noesen stated he wished to “exercise my right not to participate in”1 certain tasks, including dispensing birth control pills for contraceptive purposes.2

Getting such fundamental facts so wrong is inexcusable, especially when they are so easy to find. [/Edit]

Smathers has UW priorities a little out of whack

Edit – please view this post at its new location

In his BH editorial today, Jason Smathers ends with a nice point about how there shouldn’t be a choice between making UW-Madison an elite academic school and keeping it accessible to the people of Wisconsin.

Although tuition caps would be a great relief to the student body, they could prevent an increase intended to maintain the world-class education students at UW-Madison receive. And if the value of that college degree plummets because of it, accessibility will be meaningless.

It shouldn’t be a choice; it should be a balance. Through lobbying and negotiations, we may be able to fine-tune that balance rather than succumb to one end of the spectrum.

But that depends on the Legislature. And that is a whole other column.

However, the column up until that point makes the argument that if we had to pick between the two we should strive for accessibility rather than academic quality. I feel that I am able to add a slightly different perspective to this discussion coming from a state where there is no big public school of even close to the quality that we have here in Madison. For many Wisconsinites, an elite state school might be the kind of thing where you never realize just how good it was until its already gone.

But when UW is treated in the most holistic sense as the state’s economic engine, the economic and social benefits to be had from a larger pool of college graduates is far greater. More grads mean higher median income, which means more tax revenue and a more secure economy for Wisconsin. So in this sense, the priority of the state should certainly be put on accessibility first.

This issue of quantity vs. quality when it comes to higher education needs to be viewed from a state-wide perspective. UW-Madison is one of 13 4-year schools that make up the UW System. As long as some of these schools are accessible to the entirety of the people of Wisconsin, there is no reason to sacrifice quality education here at UW-Madison. While having more people with a college degree is good for the economy as Smathers points out, if you want companies like Microsoft and Google to invest in Wisconsin then you need a school that has quality not just quantity. UW-Madison attracts people like David DeWitt to do research here. They in turn attract investment from companies like Microsoft. This kind of stuff doesn’t happen at mediocre schools, or least not with the frequency is does at very good ones.

[Edit] Its not just the computer companies either. Despite the pessimistic article, goals like this are the product of an elite research university.

At the time he signed the executive order, Doyle cited competition from states like California. The passage of the Proposition 71 ballot initiative made the state of California the world’s largest funder of stem cell research, and it has tried to cherry pick UW-Madison’s stem cell researchers, including Thomson.

Thomson, who now operates a research lab as an adjunct professor at the University of California-Santa Barbara in addition to his duties at UW, said earlier this year that Wisconsin must invest $50 million annually to keep pace with California’s stem cell investment.

Sacrificing funding to keep this university an elite academic institution risks losing these top notch professors and researchers that cause companies who hire very high skilled workers to come to Wisconsin. [/Edit]

That means more direct focus on increasing financial aid or, at the very least — and this may be the easiest solution — stop approving building projects that have seen systemwide segregated fees increase at faster rates than tuition. UW may drop a little in the rankings, but if students are continually priced out of higher education, this state will continue to fall by the wayside.

While I agree that stopping unnecessary building projects that increase seg fees would definitely be a good thing, allowing UW to slip in the rankings is what will cause the state to fall by the wayside, not pricing people out. Think there is a brain drain problem now? Just wait till the success of graduating high school classes are measured by how many kids go to out of state schools. There is a segment of the Wisconsin population that is looking to attend a academically elite school irrespective of the cost. If the UW System doesn’t meet that need then they will just leave the state. That’s exactly the reason I’m here, student loans and all, paying out of state tuition. The balance that Smathers talks about can be achieved through the UW System as a whole. If UW is going to slip in quality then it just becomes another one of the 13 UW System schools and fails to offer Wisconsin residents any kind of choice.

Besides, if your UW-Madison degree is really worth $250,000 to $800,000 as Wiley told Smathers and the cost of a year here $18,990, then isn’t the 80 grand worth of debt on of the best investments you could ever make?

Let the other schools provide the accessibility and the quantity. UW-Madison needs to be responsible for the quality.

Edit: I think we can agree that our disagreement should never have to happen

Potential end to the Charter cable monopoly?

Edit – Please view this post at its new location

Apparently AT&T has eventual plans to bring a TV service to the Madison area that it calls U-verse. It’s not exactly the same thing as cable instead using fiber optics to bring the connection most of the way to your home then copper cable the rest of the way, very similar to how DSL works. While not being cable itself, it would attempting to competing for the same piece of the market as cable.

The best part is that U-verse carries the Big Ten Network, which will potentially force Charter to do the same or lose out on a number of subscribers.

Another piece of good news is that installation is free to new AT&T customers.

Professional installation of all U-verse services is included for new U-verse TV customers.

This solves one potential barrier to bringing the Big Ten Network via U-verse to thousands of students’ homes. However that doesn’t mean landlords will neccessarily be cooperative about installation. I think the best bet for students to get the Big Ten Network is that the increased competition will force Charter to carry it, that way avoiding the hassle of having an entirely new service installed.

Daily Cardinal LTE couldn’t be more wrong. Leckrone should stick around for another couple of decades.

Edit – Please view this post at its new location

The Daily Cardinal letter to the editor today by Howard Bregman calling for Mike Leckrone, the director of the UW Marching Band to step down one was one of the most ill-informed, out of touch things I have potentially ever heard. I say this as a freshman member of the band speaking from my experiences with the band and Mike. I feel as though almost every point made in the article needs to be rebutted and so the most effective way to respond is point by point. Therefore without further ado, on to the line by line….

I had the opportunity to attend the Mike Leckrone Spring Concert this past weekend. Well, I suppose it was actually the Wisconsin Band Spring Concert, but one could have mistaken the band for an instrument of and a backdrop for Mr. Leckrone’s ego.

To claim that Mike has an ego based upon a single concert demonstrates the lack of knowledge about the band on the part of the author. Also, the Spring Concert provides the most money for the band of anything we do and allows us to go on trips, of which we get to choose the destination, like our one last fall to Las Vegas.

One has to be reminded that the star of this event is nominally an organization of students. Yet only a single band member was recognized by name. And on this, the night of their final public performance, no graduating seniors were recognized. Stunningly, the band was never directed to stand as a unit to accept applause while Mr. Leckrone took his bows. Such behavior at a professional orchestra would raise eyebrows, let alone at a student concert.

First, while only 1 band member may have been recognized by name, this is part of Mike’s philosophy when it comes to directing the band. He doesn’t like to single out individuals. His least 2 favorite times of the year are having to pick a drum major and having to cut people. On the Ohio State trip he commented to us that if we had a tradition like having a tuba player dot the “i” they would never be singled out with the name recognition the same way Ohio State does. It’s part of a philosophy. Think of it like the New England Patriots being introduced as a team at the Super Bowl the year they beat the Rams. Its a team concept. The final night of performance by the seniors was in fact the Saturday night performance and the last thing Mike did was have them stand up and have the audience give them a round of applause. The only night the band did not stand to accept applause was Thursday. We stood for applause when we were announced in the next two performances, a change to the show that was made by Mike himself. Even if the band never stood for applause we all know that when people applaud him we are really included in that applause. Just like when the captains of a football team accept a championship trophy. He is just the figurehead of the band and we all know that.

And yet we were treated to seeing Mr. Leckrone taking the baton from the band’s Assistant Director, Ernest Jennings – who served as a stand- in conductor for the very few times when Mr. Leckrone was not front and center – without a word of public thanks or recognition. We saw two home-made videos, one cast with him exclusively and the other with students, but with him back again at the finale. And in a scene that can only be described as grotesque, the American flag was marched in by an ROTC unit, not to be saluted, but to be used as a prop; because at the same time Mr. Leckrone was suspended by a wire, doing back flips while sailing over the audience. It was clear which spectacle was supposed to get the greater attention.

As opposed to Mike stopping to thank Ernest for conducting after every song? That would have been entirely unnecessary. Just like stopping to recognize Mike or the band after each song. Ernest was recognized at the end of the show. The first video may have been about Mike. So what? I thought the video was a very fitting introduction to the show that managed to entertain me all 3 nights. To say Mike was anything but a minor part of the second video would be a lie. The video was the introduction to the drumline feature, a part of the show I might add where Mike was not present in person at all, and was a spoof of the movie 300, featuring the drumline instead of the Spartans. Mike was in the video for about 5 seconds and was played the part mocking the evil Persian emperor Xerxes. As for the flag and the ROTC unit, this was during a portion of the show while the band was playing an arrangement of “Americans We” with fireworks going off, confetti dropping form the rafters and Mike flying around. Clearly designed to be part of a celebration of America. Every display of the American flag does not have to in a solemn honorary setting.Celebrating America by doing backflips hardly seems “grotesque.”

It is time for Mr. Leckrone to retire, or to be retired. No one should direct an artistic organization for 40 years, no matter his accomplishments. The fact that he has survived this long is evidence either of the strength of his cult of personality, or of the fact that the university leaders simply do not care enough about the band. They would tolerate no similar tenure of a football or basketball coach, even more so because at its best the band has been no better than 3rd best in the Big Ten.

Mike is still around because he is one of the most capable band leaders anywhere in the country, even at age 72 and going on his 40th year. Believe it or not there were several band directors from unnamed west coast colleges who had heard about our Spring Concert and had come to see it in hopes of replicating something similar at their own schools. As for school officials forcing Mike to retire. I laugh that you think the university leaders have such control. If anyone ever even tried fired Mike I believe the backlash would be unlike anything this school has ever seen. I would guess that the majority of the band would quit in protest probably leaving us with no band at all. Not to mention the backlash from donors to the athletic department and the school in general. There are 39 years of band alumni who would probably be pretty angry. Not to mention the number of people who just are fans of the band in general. To say that we wouldn’t tolerate such a long tenure from a football or basketball coach is to ignore several striking examples from the world of college sports. Joe Paterno and Bobby Bowden come to mind. No school ever forces out beloved heads of their sports teams, even after decades, even if they’ve been there way too long. To suggest that somehow the band would be better off with another director is asinine. It is an objective fact that there could be no better director of the Wisconsin band at this moment than Mike Leckrone. Ask any band member.

Words cannot describe how incorrect the last part of the last sentence is. To suggest that the UW Band is only the 3rd best in the Big Ten clearly shows a lack of understanding of anything about marching bands and a lack of school pride. First of all there are no college marching band rankings and even if there were, who is to say they would be correct. Just look at how flawed the BCS is, and they get to at least have objective winners of each matchup. College bands are performing by themselves at most halftime shows, save the 1 or 2 roadtrips a year plus a potential bowl game. As a member of the band I can’t tell you how many times people have come up and told me we were the best band they had ever seen. At the Outback Bowl Tennessee fans openly told us we were better than their band, one of the most well respected bands in the country and the SEC. Also having seen the OSU band in person when we traveled to the game this year, I don’t think its fair to compare our two bands. We each have such different styles that there really is no valid comparison, we each have things they clearly do better than the other.

One only has to reflect on the most telling moment of the concert this past Friday, when Mr. Leckrone took the baton from Mr. Jennings after floating in a second time from the Kohl Center rafters, and remarked “Let’s not forget whose bande this is.” Well, it is he who has forgotten. The band belongs first to the students of the University, and perhaps even to the people of Wisconsin. But it is certainly not his personal property.

Seriously, can’t you take a joke. If you didn’t think Mike’s comment was funny then don’t laugh. No matter who the band “belongs” to, the director is in control and Mike is the director.

There is no question that in the 39 years of his tenure, Mr. Leckrone has re-invented the band, and turned it into something simply brand new. But the halftime music at football games is outdated. The formations are tired. The drum major, the supposed leader of the band, is nothing more than a baton twirler in Mr. Leckrone’s shadow, be it on the field or in the pre-game concerts at Union South, where no one gets the microphone or center stage except the band director.

That first sentence might be the only decent thing written in the article. I’m sorry that Justin Timberlake and 50 Cent don’t exactly translate well into marching band music. I think playing music that’s not neccessarily your favorite is a small price to pay for such an excellent director. We play a wide variety of some music and some of the best ever written, take the Rolling Stones and West Side Story shows for example. The drum major is definitely a leader in the band. Notice how Rachel blows the whistle to start the band marching on the field? She’s the first one on the field for pregame. Her name and hometown are announced while she high steps out and the band stands still before she leads the band down the field. Mike’s name is announced once at halftime to the same basic introduction that every marching band you ever see will use “… and now, under the direction of Professor Michael Leckrone, the University of Wisconsin Marching Baaaand.” Rachel is by far a bigger feature of the halftime shows than Mike ever is. As for at Union South, no drum major of any band you will ever see will introduce the songs. Besides Mike has a great stage presence that I think really adds to the performances of the band.

Has he done anything to prepare for the transition to a new director, should his advancing age force him to step aside? The only time he does not lead the band at a football, basketball, or hockey game is when he has a more important game to attend. Mr. Jennings is relegated to volleyball. One would reasonably expect someone else to be given a shot at least 1 of every 4 or 5 big games.

First of all, Ernest is new this year. He had to be caught up to speed on the basics of how we do things here. Expecting him to take any kind of lead role in a band he has been a part of for less than the majority of the members would be entirely unrealistic. That being said he really has done a great job this year. Once again you demonstrate a lack of understanding of how bands work. The director is the director. Its not a part time job that you slowly transfer over to someone else. Think of it as the head coach of a football team. During Barry Alvarez’s last year, should he have stepped aside to let someone else get some practice head coaching? Of course not. Bands work in a pretty similar way. Besides, Ernest has directed several bands throughout his career. He is perfectly qualified as he stands right now to direct just about any band in the country including this one. He leads the drumline practices and directs at least one concert band within the School of Music. Any kind of transition steps would be entirely unnecessary.

There are undoubtedly many who worship this man, and he probably deserves some of it. But what he does not deserve is full personal control of the band and, by extension, control of the many dedicated student musicians. There is simply no reason that this band should not be challenging the bands of Ohio State and Michigan for supremacy. What that requires is someone who is fearful for his job; someone who knows that unless he moves the marker forward, he might be replaced. “On Wisconsin” demands change.

Hold on there Barack Obama. I can safely say in this instance change would be a terrible idea. First of all there is no reason the director shouldn’t have full control of the band. That’s how it works and for good reason. I think to say that our band does not challenge the bands of Ohio State and Michigan is not only an insult to everyone associated with our band program but a flat out lie. We are very comparable to both of those bands. Take it from someone who has seen all 3 perform. To say that Mike needs to be fearful for his job in order to perform proficiently is an insult not only to him but to competent people everywhere. It is possible for people to do an amazing job without the fear of being replaced. Having potentially one of the most secure jobs in the state of Wisconsin does not stop him from coming to practice each day with more fire, intensity and passion that I did as someone who was competing on a daily basis just to keep a spot on the field. You have no idea about the amount of work he puts in to make this band what it is today. He writes or arranges just about every song we play and writes every drill we march. I can’t even imagine the number of hours he puts in to make the Spring Concert the success it is every year.

We do not need to suffer through the ego trip of Mr. Leckrone’s 40th year at Wisconsin and another self-serving spring concert. His retirement, and the eventual ascension of Mr. Jennings or another deserving candidate, should be forthcoming.

Sorry, this has been a much longer response than I intended it to be originally, but I feel like the general student population doesn’t realize what a great director we have for our marching band and I couldn’t allow people as ignorant and stupid on the subject to go unanswered.

Edit: Kristina Hemstead’s responsive LTE the next day

More evidence of the lack of funding from the state legislature

Edit – please view this post at its new location

This Wisconsin State Journal article makes a pretty compelling argument. Sam Clegg and Suchita Shah have both recently argued that a lack of funding from the state legislature is the problem here at UW-Madison. However, recent discussion has lacked a state-wide perspective on the state legislature’s funding of higher education across the state at other UW System schools. The State Journal article clearly makes the case that it is indeed the failures of the state legislature to properly fund higher education and not anything we are doing wrong here on the isthmus.

5 of the 13 Chancellors of UW System schools are leaving. While it is natural for chancellors to leave, the article says the nationwide average is 8.5 years and thus we should be having 1 to 2 chancellors leaving every year on average, 2 of them are leaving for better compensation packages.

“I really love UW River Falls, ” Betz said. “Had it been a level playing field it would have been a very different decision. I would have seriously considered staying at River Falls. It wasn ‘t a level playing field.“

This is clearly not totally to blame on the state legislature, the Board of Regents determine chancellor salaries and then the state legislature approves them, but the funding for their salaries comes from funding that is determined by the state legislature and so inadequate funding from the state legislature forces UW schools to make the choice to prioritize funding. In the case of chancellor salaries it is clear that we are losing out on quality for the sake of saving money.

Jimmy Peltier, faculty chair of the UW-Whitewater chancellor search and screening committee, said he is pleased with the pool of candidates to fill the position.

Still, he noted, prospective candidates often must choose between the quality of the system and a potentially lower salary.

“One of our disadvantages we have as a state is we don ‘t offer salaries other states offer, ” Peltier said. “And that’s a challenge. “

Yet when members of the state legislature make statements on the search for the new UW-Madison Chancellor like this one by Joan Ballweg, who is the vice chair of the Assemblies Colleges and Universities Committee, is makes me wonder if they realize how little their funding allows us to pay our chancellors.

“I think this needs to be a person that would be a CEO of any Fortune 500 company, with expertise in education of course, but someone who really can understand the business side and the real side of what a major company or major institution would be.

The average Fortune 500 CEO makes an average of $15.2 million (maybe we could hire Steve Jobs away if we offered $700 million). How can we be expected to be competing to hire people like that when we are discussing raising the salary of the UW-Madison chancellor to not even $500,000. I’m sure people who are qualified to take jobs that pay over $15 million will be glad to take less than 1/30th of that to come be our chancellor. (Maybe if she would stop trying to tax the Amish and figure out a way to get us some more money we wouldn’t have these issues)

More importantly, chancellors salaries across the UW System schools are representative of the lack of financial commitment to higher education coming from the people down at the end of State Street. Seriously, there has been enough discussion about this. Now its time to get off your asses and do something.

Edit: Here is the Daily Cardinal’s version of basically the same story, including an interesting quote not in the WSJ article.

“It is pretty well known that the current salaries that chancellors are making in the state are not competitive nationally,” Betz said.

Edit: 5 could become 6