Cullerton advances legislative scholarship ban
Wednesday, May 2, 2012 - Posted by Rich Miller
* The House approved a bill in March to abolish the so-called General Assembly scholarship program by a vote of 79-29. The bill has been sitting in a Senate subcommittee ever since, and the chairperson of that subcommittee, Sen. Kim Lightford, is a major GA scholarship advocate…
“I think it is a valuable resource that we are dismantling,” Lightford said. “I just believe we’re responding to media pressure.”
* It looked for a time like we were in for the same pattern: GA scholarship bill passes House, Senate kills it.
But Senate President John Cullerton took over the sponsorship of the bill after being beaten up badly by editorial boards far and wide. He also tacked on an amendment which mandates that all tuition waivers, valued at $415 million a year, be studied by a new Tuition and Fee Waiver Task Force, with a report due back by April 15, 2013.
The subcommittee moved the bill to the full committee on a 2-0-1 vote, with Lightford abstaining. The bill now appears headed for passage. And as long as there are no shenanigans in the House, once that chamber concurs with the amendment it’ll head to the governor’s desk before too long.
The legislative scholarship program has done a lot of good over the years, but too many of those scholarships were passed out as blatant political favors. It was time to end it. Past time, really. But, hey, sometimes things take a little time.
* From a Cullerton press release…
While Cullerton has long held that reforming the legislative scholarship program was possible, it has become clear that the majority of the General Assembly supports ending rather than reforming the program.
“This program has become a major distraction from what should be the focus the session – the state budget, Medicaid and pension reform, said President Cullerton. “It’s time to put it behind us so that we can turn our attention to larger issues that must be addressed this year.”
This step follows Cullerton’s past efforts to reform the General Assembly scholarship program by targeting specific abuses revealed by investigations and media reports. Reforms included prohibiting awards to family members of political contributors, blocking waivers to students outside of a member’s legislative district, and tightening the requirements for applicants.
As part of the effort to reform the system, Cullerton has also been a proponent of reviewing state requirements for all tuition waivers. Given the fact that the General Assembly scholarship program makes up only 3.25 percent of the total value of all state tuition waivers, Cullerton believes there may be a need for more scrutiny related to cost and requirements associated with the universe of waivers. The bill calls for a task force to review all waivers and report findings on or before April 15, 2013.
The bill abolishes the 103 year old General Assembly scholarship program by striking the program from state statute this year.
Discuss.
- Chris - Wednesday, May 2, 12 @ 11:02 am:
As a Cullerton constituent (but an unimportant one) I did add my strongly-worded voice to the “why let this farce continue?” chorus. So, until proven otherwise, I’ll claim credit.
- wordslinger - Wednesday, May 2, 12 @ 11:22 am:
Long overdue, it it happens. The waivers were never tied to any criteria other than the largesse of legislators. Not good enough.
- D.P. Gumby - Wednesday, May 2, 12 @ 11:50 am:
Let’s just hope this isn’t a backdoor to eliminate the university employee’s tuition discount, which is very financially reasonable.
- chad - Wednesday, May 2, 12 @ 12:16 pm:
Please let this thing die. There is no rational basis upon which to rely on legislator judgement on who is the most needy or deserving student. And, this is one of those “entry-level” opportunities for leading a legislator down the path toward ethical corruption. We have such a corrupt reputation — let’s begin to turn the ship around.
- Both Sides Now - Wednesday, May 2, 12 @ 12:18 pm:
“Let’s just hope this isn’t a backdoor to eliminate the university employee’s tuition discount”
That would be fine with me. I’ve never understood why this perk is added to University employee’s compensation packages. I’ve heard the arguments about it being “needed to attract professional/the best staff”, “used primarily by lower tier/lower wage employees” and “only given to employees with a longer tenure”. The arguments don’t work together. I expect the “professional/best staff” are not the “lower tier/lower wage employees” who are supposedly the ones who use it most. So the partial waivers are not “necessary” to attract them! And as far as those at a lower wage level, I’m going to bet there are plenty of people in today’s economy who would love to have that job - even without a partial tuition waiver for their child!
But don’t worry Gumby, if enacted, the new Commission will have almost a year to make their report. Then the GA will at best decide to put a bill on the table in the spring of 2014. More likely, it will go into File 13 like so many other lame Commission reports.
Buck up GA and do your jobs! You wouldn’t cut the tuition waivers which affect only a few, you’re waivering on cutting the Legislative scholarships which affect only a (often-priviledged) few, but it’s OK to dramatically reduce benefits to the elderly, the needy, and the retirees who dedicated their careers to you!?!
- Wensicia - Wednesday, May 2, 12 @ 12:25 pm:
It’s about time he finally gets it. This scholarship program is not about helping cash-strapped students. It’s a legislative perk, plain and simple, as was the ease through which it had been abused. There’s no advantage in its continued support; I’m pleased Cullerton’s ready to end and move on to more “important” things.
- Shore - Wednesday, May 2, 12 @ 12:29 pm:
“Fixing” this problem doesn’t help the kids who got screwed before. So much for the idea that Democrats are for “fairness”.
- FeeWaiverTaskForce-YeahRight - Wednesday, May 2, 12 @ 2:50 pm:
I seriously doubt this “task force”, probably made up of legislators, will go after anyone, much less leadership, who have been blatantly abusing this system for years.
- Chris - Wednesday, May 2, 12 @ 4:20 pm:
” I’ve never understood why this perk is added to University employee’s compensation packages. I’ve heard the arguments about it being “needed to attract professional/the best staff””
Well, it’s pretty standard at private colleges/universities, and there is a *big* reciprocity network. I had several friends at my (expensive) private uni who were children of faculty at namebrand colleges. So, if you are trying to attract a faculty member to UIUC, and the alternaitve is NWU or UofC, and s/he has kids who are closing in on college age, it’s a HUGE disadvantage to not be able to offer the tuition benefit.
Think it’s wrong to do it, but the fact is it would create a competitive disadvantage, at least w/r/t faculty.