Nothing to Cut?
A reader forwarded this to me with the comment:
Owen- With all of the Governor’s fear mongering on government shutdowns, it’s interesting that he hasn’t said anything about shutting things like this down. Apparently he prioritizes this over our corrections department, since he’s already suggested closing prisons. Even if one thought this sort of thing had value, is a library satisfaction survey amongst the UW LGBT community really more important than an effective corrections system? Is this the same governor that has insisted we’ve already cut all the fat out of state government?
From: MAREN J GREATHOUSE
Date: Oct 17, 2007 2:13 PM
Subject: Transgender Library Survey
To: .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address), .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address), .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) , .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address), .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address), .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) , .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)
Greetings!The LGBT Campus Center Graduate Librarian, Estevan Montano, is conducting a survey of UW students who identity as transgender/transexual/genderqueer/crodresser about their use, satisfaction and interest in the UW Library system at UW Madison. If you are a UW student who identifies in the transgender spectrum, please take a moment to complete this anonymous survey.
http://www.questionpro.com/akira/TakeSurvey?id=801172
Thanks!
****************************************
Maren J. Greathouse
Associate Student Services Specialist
LGBT Campus Center
University of Wisconsin, Madison
800 Langdon Street
Madison, WI 53703
[contact info witheld]
OK, I’ll bite. Who knew you had transgendered readers!
Which mailing list is “Reader” on?Posted by John Foust on October 18, 2007 at 1750 hrs
And could they please explain how transgendered and genderqueer people use a library that is different from the way everyone else uses a library.
Posted by HeatherRadish on October 18, 2007 at 1904 hrs
$30,000 down. A couple of billion to go.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 18, 2007 at 1951 hrs
<snicker> Genderqueer </snicker>
Posted by Aaron on October 18, 2007 at 2052 hrs
@Heather: things like never seeing representation of people you identify with unless they’re being enfreaked, condemned, marginalized, or being called mentally ill, for example.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 18, 2007 at 2153 hrs
One more person who doesn’t understand how government funding works. You think Doyle had any idea this was going on? He signs a bill that appropriates money to the UW System, which appropriates money to UW-Madison, which appropriates money to the Office of the Dean of Students, which appropriates money to the LGBT Campus Center, which uses the funds to hire staff.
The Vukmir staff can’t be bothered to be in their damn office more than two days a week. Ask any staffer or lobbyist who’s tried to find them. It’s impossible. So maybe that’s Doyle’s fault too. After all, he signed off on a budget that made their jobs possible.
Maybe we should cut Vukmir’s staff then. We can transfer the savings directly to the Department of Corrections from the Legislature.
No. That’s absolutely asinine. Doyle’s job is to set spending on broad levels, and those below him are entrusted with the responsibility to appropriate that money wisely. If people don’t like how that’s being done, they can vote Doyle out of office.
But considering that Doyle kicked Mark Green’s ass, I guess Wisconsin must be okay with LGBT library surveys.
Oh, and Heather, how will we ever know if LGBT students’ attitudes towards and use of the library is different from those of straight kids unless we do the survey? Duh.
I love watching conservatives get all wound up about this stuff. It’s just like watching liberals get wound up about impeachment. I could pop a bowl of popcorn and watch this stuff all night.
Posted by Recess Supervisor on October 18, 2007 at 2202 hrs
RS,
“Doyle’s job is to set spending on broad levels…” Actually, the legislature does that and the executive branch prioritizes the spending in individual departments.
So I guess we agree… if we cut spending at broad levels there is plenty of room in the budget without cutting vital services.
Whew. I’m glad we got that out of the way.
Posted by Owen on October 18, 2007 at 2209 hrs
I couldn’t help myself.
I took the survey!
Posted by Aaron on October 18, 2007 at 2209 hrs
Okay, trying to reconcile conflicting information here—as every other source has said that the governor specifically, obviously said that prisons will not be shut down. So the source on the opposite statement here? And where did I miss the $30,000 cost, Keith?
Thanks in advance for answers. But don’t let being reality-based stop the rest of you, who now can return to the regularly scheduled programming of bashing everyone in sight for being Democrats, gay—or if you’re really lucky, maybe both! C’mon, you can dream.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 18, 2007 at 2258 hrs
Hey, I have no problem with evaluating services and cutting programs that serve no purpose. But we must all remember that one of Mike Huebsch’s most passionate budget defenses was a few years ago (‘03, maybe?) when he fought attempts within his own caucus to cut a totally worthless and unutilized weapons hotline because it was originally a Republican initiative.
My problem with the AssGOP budget is not that it restricted spending, and I’ve acknowledged that in the past on multiple occasions. My problem was that they did so by choosing cuts they knew were impractical and totally unsalvageable. They BS’ed the details because it was the only way they could accomplish an aggregate goal. That’s hampered them the whole way in the negotiations.
What they did would be the equivalent of balancing your household budget by cutting your utility costs to 12 bucks a month. Sure, the number at the bottom works. But the details are unattainable. That’s why they’re stuck now.
And that’s not exclusively the fault of the moderates. That whole budget shows the remarkable lack of logic and creativity among ALL members of that caucus. When they lose on this compromise - and lose they will - it’s going to be because they started with such a rickety plan to begin with.
If you’re going to cut, be smart about how you’re cutting.
Posted by Recess Supervisor on October 19, 2007 at 0150 hrs
What they did would be the equivalent of balancing your household budget by cutting your utility costs to 12 bucks a month. Sure, the number at the bottom works. But the details are unattainable. That’s why they’re stuck now.
Hey, tell that to Scott, and his Universal Health Care dreams…
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 19, 2007 at 0853 hrs
It was a WAG Kay.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 19, 2007 at 1320 hrs
Regardless of the funding and who is responsible for it, this still begs the question of “why do they need a special survey for LBGTs?” I mean, why not just have one survey for ALL users of the library?
Will they have special surveys sent out to just white people? Black people? Asians? Native Americans? Disabled people? Rich people? Poor people? Alchoholics? People who are afraid of clowns? People with cats? The Irish? Christians? Jews? Muslims? People with OCD? Morning people? Funny people? People who shower once a week? Bloggers?
You get the picture…
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 19, 2007 at 1458 hrs
RS said,
“Doyle’s job is to set spending on broad levels…”
and Owen responded with,
“Actually the legislature does that and the executive branch prioritizes the spending in individual departments.”
Neither of these blanket statements is 100% correct and I think you both know it.
The Executive branch proposes its budget and has the discretion to prioritize and be as specific he or she wishes. Once a budget is proposed, it’s only as useful as the legislative branch allows it to be. Look at the federal budget – any paper copies of President Bush’s budget proposal sent to Dem offices on Capitol Hill have long since been recycled into cafeteria wrappers.
It never adopts a budget verbatim of course, and it always delves into the details of an individual department and program. Owen, you’re not fooling anyone with your response…certainly you saw the specific funding for UW building projects and cuts to only certain communities included in the Assembly budget for instance.
A budget passed by the legislature is a legal document. An executive or their department head does not have the discretion to simply shift funds between departments or programs on a whim. If the Legislature said Corrections gets $20 and DHFS gets $10 next biennium, the Governor cannot simply decide to spend $20 on DHFS and $10 on corrections. Nor can a Governor simply overrule any programmatic decisions made by the Legislature. Again, look at the specific shared revenue funding levels set by the Assembly in their budget. If that were adopted and Doyle ignored it by allocating more money to Beloit or Milwaukee, it would technically be illegal.
Now in the case of this office or study, there probably is no line item for it in the UW Budget. It’s probably the UW’s discretion to fund it. So in this sense you are both kind of right – it’s highly unlikely Governor Doyle and even the head of the UW had any involvement in creating this program or funding this study, and the Legislature probably did not fund this office or study as a specific line item.
If it’s not specifically mentioned in a budget a Governor can kill it. If it is, he can propose its elimination in his next budget. Legislators on the other hand love to deal with things through the budget because killing funding is the same as killing the program. I remember one federal Transportation Approps bill in 2003 (I think) that said funds would be denied to any public transportation system that sold advertising with a pro-pot legalization message. They can and will get that detailed.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 19, 2007 at 1905 hrs
The LGBT Campus Center at the UW-Madison isn’t funded by state money, so this is irrelevant to your discussion of the state budget.
Gig’em
Ric, ‘91Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on October 22, 2007 at 1128 hrs
How could they please explain how transgendered and genderqueer people use a library that is different from the way everyone else uses a library? I can’t believe this.
_____________________
architectural shadePosted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on May 10, 2008 at 0541 hrs
Total Entries: 20000
Total Comments: 134051
Most Recent Entry: 05/25/2012 06:26 am
Most Recent Comment on: 05/25/2012 10:25 am
Total Members: 9751
Total Logged in members: 0
Total guests: 116
Total anonymous users: 2
Most Recent Visitor on: 05/25/2012 11:14 am
The most visitors ever was 538 on 12/01/2007 02:11 pm
Protected and licensed under a Creative Commons License (some rights reserved).