Dear Deborah,<div><br></div><div>You make a good point, but it's a subtle one. I don't think most casual observers or even legislators will take the message about cutting state funding further. I think it's important to show solidarity with a colleague who has the stature to make our concerns audible. Moreover, I think the letter is worth endorsing just for the "tyranny of the minority" line. I've signed.</div>
<div><br></div><div>From the land of Guelphs and Ghibelines,</div><div><br></div><div>Steve</div><div>-- <br>Steven Gould Axelrod<br>President, The Robert Lowell Society<br>Co-editor, The New Anthology of American Poetry, Vols. 1-3<br>
Professor of English<br>University of California<br>Riverside, CA 92521<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 5:55 AM, Deborah Willis <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:dwill@ucr.edu">dwill@ucr.edu</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">I'm having trouble making up my mind about this letter. I like many things<br>
about it, but I also have a major reservation. If not a relatively equitable<br>
distribution of pay cuts (i.e. furloughs), what then? The letter repeats a<br>
soundbyte I keep seeing in news articles --that UC's overall budget is $19<br>
billion, while the paycuts to faculty and staff only come to a piddly $193<br>
million. The implication seems to be that UC has tons of money hidden away<br>
somewhere that could be used to plug this tiny 1% hole. Though it's not<br>
Lakoff's point, in other contexts the message people take from this $19<br>
billion/$193 million contrast is that cuts to UC shouldn't be a problem. In fact,<br>
since UC is so wealthy, why not just cut state funding even more?<br>
<br>
Well...sure, the UC budget is huge. It's a 10-campus operation, with<br>
multiple hospitals and multiple research centers, etc etc. And 72% percent of<br>
that $19 billion budget total are "restricted funds" -- meaning the funds come<br>
from grants, contracts, donations, and other such sources, which are<br>
earmarked for specific things and can't legally be used for faculty salaries.<br>
Salaries etc come from "core funds," the remaining 28% of the overall budget.<br>
A fairer contrast would be $5.3 billion vs. $193 million. Okay, $5.3 billion is<br>
still a lot of money. But finding that $193 million from the "core funds" to<br>
prevent faculty/staff paycuts means taking it away from faculty/staff salaries<br>
and/or basic operations. In other words, it would mean laying off some faculty<br>
and staff altogether or shutting down some units, or ... closing UC<br>
Merced/UCR/UC Santa Cruz. We're back to the Scull letter, or worse.<br>
<br>
Maybe there is a pot of gold that some administrator has hidden away<br>
somewhere. I suppose it can't hurt to ask. What I like about Lakoff's letter is<br>
that his main point is to motivate our well-connected regents to use their<br>
power to get MORE funding from the state or other sources. I like his point<br>
about the "tyranny of the minority." I like it that he includes staff along with<br>
faculty. I like it that he pans online education. I like it that he makes his point<br>
about the probable "brain drain" and its consequences for the state of<br>
California without sounding unduly elitist. I like his mournful yet controlled<br>
tone.<br>
<br>
So perhaps I will add my name to his letter. It's probably not worth spending<br>
much time brooding about it. In any case, the Regents' meeting this week<br>
should bring us closer to some clarity about what the immediate future will<br>
hold for us. For those of you interested in the proceedings, you can find the<br>
agenda, accompanying documents, and a link to streaming audio of the 3-day<br>
meeting at:<br>
<br>
<a href="http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/regents/regmeet/july09.html" target="_blank">http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/regents/regmeet/july09.html</a><br>
<br>
Deborah<br>
<br>
---- Original message ----<br>
>Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2009 09:37:15 -0700 (PDT)<br>
>From: <<a href="mailto:keithh@ucr.edu">keithh@ucr.edu</a>><br>
>Subject: Fwd: probably worth signing<br>
>To: <a href="mailto:adriana.craciun@ucr.edu">adriana.craciun@ucr.edu</a>, <a href="mailto:Andrea.Denny-Brown@ucr.edu">Andrea.Denny-Brown@ucr.edu</a>,<br>
<a href="mailto:carole.fabricant@ucr.edu">carole.fabricant@ucr.edu</a>, <a href="mailto:cf7516@gmail.com">cf7516@gmail.com</a>, <a href="mailto:Caroleanne.tyler@ucr.edu">Caroleanne.tyler@ucr.edu</a>,<br>
<a href="mailto:Deborah.Willis@ucr.edu">Deborah.Willis@ucr.edu</a>, <a href="mailto:erica.edwards@ucr.edu">erica.edwards@ucr.edu</a>, <a href="mailto:George.Haggerty@ucr.edu">George.Haggerty@ucr.edu</a>,<br>
<a href="mailto:heidi.braymanhackel@ucr.edu">heidi.braymanhackel@ucr.edu</a>, <a href="mailto:jamestobias@mindspring.com">jamestobias@mindspring.com</a>,<br>
<a href="mailto:James.Tobias@ucr.edu">James.Tobias@ucr.edu</a>, <a href="mailto:jennifer.doyle@ucr.edu">jennifer.doyle@ucr.edu</a>, <a href="mailto:John.Briggs@ucr.edu">John.Briggs@ucr.edu</a>,<br>
<a href="mailto:John.Ganim@ucr.edu">John.Ganim@ucr.edu</a>, <a href="mailto:joseph.childers@ucr.edu">joseph.childers@ucr.edu</a>, <a href="mailto:katherine.kinney@ucr.edu">katherine.kinney@ucr.edu</a>,<br>
<a href="mailto:keith.harris@ucr.edu">keith.harris@ucr.edu</a>, <a href="mailto:devlinucr@earthlink.net">devlinucr@earthlink.net</a>, <a href="mailto:michelle.raheja@ucr.edu">michelle.raheja@ucr.edu</a>,<br>
<a href="mailto:rise.axelrod@ucr.edu">rise.axelrod@ucr.edu</a>, <a href="mailto:rob.latham@ucr.edu">rob.latham@ucr.edu</a>, <a href="mailto:Stanley.Stewart@ucr.edu">Stanley.Stewart@ucr.edu</a>,<br>
<a href="mailto:Steven.Axelrod@ucr.edu">Steven.Axelrod@ucr.edu</a>, <a href="mailto:susan.zieger@ucr.edu">susan.zieger@ucr.edu</a>, <a href="mailto:Tiffany.Lopez@ucr.edu">Tiffany.Lopez@ucr.edu</a>,<br>
<a href="mailto:Traise.Yamamoto@ucr.edu">Traise.Yamamoto@ucr.edu</a>, <a href="mailto:Vorris.Nunley@ucr.edu">Vorris.Nunley@ucr.edu</a>, <a href="mailto:englecturers@lists.ucr.edu">englecturers@lists.ucr.edu</a><br>
<div class="im">><br>
>Please see the letter below. Please forward.<br>
>Keith<br>
><br>
>Keith M. Harris<br>
>Associate Professor<br>
>Media & Cultural Studies<br>
>INTS 3126<br>
>900 University Ave.<br>
>Riverside, CA 92521<br>
>(951) 827-1016<br>
><a href="mailto:keith.harris@ucr.edu">keith.harris@ucr.edu</a><br>
</div>>________________<br>
>Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2009 08:26:56 -0700<br>
>From: Toby Miller <<a href="mailto:tobym@ucr.edu">tobym@ucr.edu</a>><br>
>Subject: Fwd: probably worth signing<br>
>To: freya schiwy <<a href="mailto:freyasch@ucr.edu">freyasch@ucr.edu</a>>, Lan Duong <<a href="mailto:lduong@ucr.edu">lduong@ucr.edu</a>>, Setsu<br>
Shigematsu <<a href="mailto:setsu.shigematsu@ucr.edu">setsu.shigematsu@ucr.edu</a>>, Keith Harris<br>
<<a href="mailto:keith.harris@ucr.edu">keith.harris@ucr.edu</a>>, Ken Rogers <<a href="mailto:ken.rogers@ucr.edu">ken.rogers@ucr.edu</a>>, Tim Labor<br>
<<a href="mailto:tim.labor@ucr.edu">tim.labor@ucr.edu</a>>, D Charles Whitney <<a href="mailto:chuck.whitney@ucr.edu">chuck.whitney@ucr.edu</a>>, Ruhi Khan<br>
<<a href="mailto:ruhi.khan@ucr.edu">ruhi.khan@ucr.edu</a>>, "<a href="mailto:derekb@ucr.edu">derekb@ucr.edu</a>> <<a href="mailto:derekb@ucr.edu">derekb@ucr.edu</a>"<br>
<<a href="mailto:derekb@ucr.edu">derekb@ucr.edu</a>>, Andrea Smith <<a href="mailto:asmith@ucr.edu">asmith@ucr.edu</a>><br>
<div><div></div><div class="h5">><br>
> This from George Lakoff--it may provide a good<br>
> way-in to the Regents' meeting, so you may wish to<br>
> consider writing George as below to support it, if<br>
> his letter makes sense to you (albeit that there is<br>
> a syntactical error in it--can't linguists even get<br>
> that right?). I think it's a pretty good letter<br>
> Toby<br>
><br>
> from: <a href="mailto:lakoff@berkeley.edu">lakoff@berkeley.edu</a><br>
> Begin forwarded message:<br>
><br>
> Dear Colleagues,<br>
> A number of you have asked me to write an open<br>
> letter to the Regents. It is attached. I am on<br>
> the docket to present it on Wednesday at the<br>
> Regents' meeting. At least one member of<br>
> Regents will speak in support of what I am<br>
> saying in it. I am also going to release it to<br>
> the press.<br>
> For these reasons, it is important to have as<br>
> many faculty endorsing the letter as possible.<br>
> If you feel you can endorse it, please send me<br>
> an email with the subject heading "Endorsement"<br>
> and with your name, title, and campus and I will<br>
> add you to the "endorsed by" list.<br>
> If there are other UC faculty who you think will<br>
> endorse it, please forward this email to them<br>
> with a copy of the letter.<br>
> I have kept the letter short - two pages.<br>
> I have not tried to say all the important things<br>
> that are being said in the email discussions.<br>
> Those things need to be said as well, but by<br>
> others. I advise against a buckshot approach.<br>
> Rather consolidate the facts and alternative<br>
> positions that the Regents need to hear in one,<br>
> or a handful, of other letters. Work on them<br>
> together if possible. Keep it as simple and<br>
> straightforward as you can. If the speakers all<br>
> say utterly different things, the Regents will<br>
> not pay attention to any of them.<br>
> Thank you for your commitment to our university.<br>
> George Lakoff<br>
</div></div>>________________<br>
>________________<br>
><br>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-<br>
</div>