The plan to give the University of Wisconsin System broad autonomy from state regulations is dead.
But much remains to be decided in the Badger State, where lawmakers are still looking for ways to reduce $300 million in cuts for higher education over the next two years.
If the proposed cuts remain, they’ll leave the system in a difficult place: heading into a two-year tuition freeze with significantly less state money than it’s accustomed to, and with none of the possible benefits of regulatory relief. Added to that troubling mix is uncertainty about the future of state laws protecting tenure and shared governance.
“That’s the crazy thing, how legislators expect to both cut state funding and cap revenues,” said Daniel J. Hurley, associate vice president for government relations and state policy at the American Association of State Colleges and Universities.
And for a state that is proud of, if conflicted about, its higher-education system, the uncertainty seems to come with little upside.
No Winners
The situation represents a political setback for Gov. Scott Walker, a possible contender for the Republican presidential nomination, who proposed the plan to cut the university loose as a “public authority” as part of his recommended budget.
Governor Walker proposed a similar plan four years ago that was meant only for the system’s flagship campus, in Madison. That also failed to pass the Legislature after resistance from other universities in the system.
The newer measure would have freed the entire system from a broad range of state regulations on employee compensation and benefits, purchasing, and planning and building campus facilities.
The catch: In exchange, the governor sought a $300-million cut in appropriations for the universities over two years and a two-year freeze on tuition for resident undergraduates.
Anticipating new regulatory freedom, the measure also would have stripped from state law faculty protections for tenure, shared governance, and academic freedom.
But legislators balked after early political missteps by the governor and concerns that a two-year freeze would simply mean that tuition would increase significantly afterward. On Tuesday leaders of the Republican-controlled Legislature announced the proposal would not be included in their final budget.
The plan’s demise could be even worse news for the system’s president, Raymond W. Cross, who negotiated with the governor for the increased autonomy before the beginning of the legislative session and later said he would resign if the recommended cuts were not reduced.
‘Under the Thumb’
That outcome seemed to grow more likely on Wednesday, when new state-budget projections showed that tax revenue was not likely to increase from earlier estimates. Without new tax money, lawmakers, who have already pledged to stave off cuts in the state’s elementary and secondary schools, would have to get creative to bolster the higher-education budget.
Mr. Cross could not be reached for comment, but a spokeswoman sent a prepared statement on behalf of the system. The statement expressed appreciation for “legislators’ willingness to work with us to reduce the proposed budget cut and to provide business flexibilities that can help build a new partnership and model for Wisconsin higher education.”
Despite the grim implications, some faculty members cheered the measure’s failure, saying that it showed lawmakers’ interest in preserving public higher education and prevented the system’s Board of Regents from having too much power.
“It would have been far worse to take the cuts and then been under the thumb of a Walker-controlled Board of Regents,” said Sara Goldrick-Rab, a professor of educational-policy studies and sociology at the University of Wisconsin at Madison. “The Wisconsin Legislature is a democratically elected body responsive to many constituencies. It does not often do terribly rash things to UW because of checks and balances.”
But that support from the Legislature will be hollow if lawmakers can’t find a way to reduce the proposed budget cuts, she added.
“The Legislature needs to ensure that the people of Wisconsin have access to the UW system in the future by ponying up the cash required to provide the education,” she said. “Passing the price of the education on to students and families, while retaining control over what that education looks like, is bad policy and will backfire.”
Eric Kelderman writes about money and accountability in higher education, including such areas as state policy, accreditation, and legal affairs. You can find him on Twitter @etkeld, or email him at eric.kelderman@chronicle.com.
