Powers rumor

[bcherry168]

The article didn't say anything about Powers "lying." It hinted that he may have with held all the facts.

General rule of thumb, when you're being questioned by lawyers - limit your answer to only what's being asked. If counsel didn't get all the information they were seeking, that's on them.

To say that everyone does it, is to sound simple-minded. Not only does everyone do it, everyone has always done it - going all the way back to Greece and Alexandria. Schools and scholars

have always been beholden to their patrons.

Now, in this country, we once had the ideal that every citizen deserved a good, public (free) education. That ideal has long since fallen by the wayside. To call our beloved University a "public

institution" has become somewhat of a mis-nomer. Only something like 12% of funding comes from the public purse today. But more than ever, politicians want to meddle in the day-to-day

functions of running a  large university of the first-class. That's the mandate of the Texas constitution. But it's harder than ever to maintain those standards and be a full-time fund raiser to boot.

That's the job of the President of our University.

The real question to me is: if everyone is doing it, why was Powers singled out. The answer is easy. He was the only one to publicly stand up to Perry and his so-called "Seven Breakthrough

Solutions." This whole thing has been a political charade since the beginning. Perry came very close to winning this thing and forever damaging the University we all love.

Thank God for Bill Powers.

Hook 'em.

I am not a total fan of Powers, but I am with him on this issue. This was not about a very few kids getting admitted, but about Perry's attempt to do things that would damage the University, and Powers' opposition to that.

Thank goodness we now have a governor who will support Texas.

 

[echeese]

a point of information (as some of you are blinded by your loyalty). . .years ago the state of Texas (read citizens) gave the University of Texas the mineral rights to a huge tract of the permian basin which has resulted in the 3rd largest endowment in the nation for a University.

Over the years the state has helped fund hundreds of millions in construction of building and infastructure. . . .

To make the statement that " only 12%" of the University's funding comes from the public is a misnomer. . . .frankly it's completely inaccurate.

Which is ironic in a debate largely centered around honesty and integrity.   Some who try to spin and misrepresent, I expect. . .others. . I am disappointed.   2 have been critical and claimed I look at the world through partisan eyes. . . .I am amused.

 

[HornNdriftwood]

a point of information (as some of you are blinded by your loyalty). . .years ago the state of Texas (read citizens) gave the University of Texas the mineral rights to a huge tract of the permian basin which has resulted in the 3rd largest endowment in the nation for a University.

Over the years the state has helped fund hundreds of millions in construction of building and infastructure. . . .

To make the statement that " only 12%" of the University's funding comes from the public is a misnomer. . . .frankly it's completely inaccurate.

Which is ironic in a debate largely centered around honesty and integrity.   Some who try to spin and misrepresent, I expect. . .others. . I am disappointed.   2 have been critical and claimed I look at the world through partisan eyes. . . .I am amused.

In the interest of full disclosure, the constitutional mandate in 1876 for a university of the first-class wouldn't have been worth the paper it was written on unless the legislature ponied up SOMETHING. But Texas had no money so the university was little more than a dream. One thing the state did have was "public land." As a mostly good faith effort, the state set aside a large parcel of W. Texas land for the future university.

A large portion of land that went to make up the Permanent University Fund (about a million acres) came from land deeded to railroads for right-of-way. The Texas and Pacific RR gave back said 1 MM acres to the state because it was deemed to worthless to survey. It was only good for grazing and not much for that. We're probably talking pennies per acre.

It was more like a gift from God than the citizens of Texas when oil was discovered in 1923. The rest, as they say, is history.

Hook 'em.

 

[Randolph Duke]

In the interest of full disclosure, the constitutional mandate in 1876 for a university of the first-class wouldn't have been worth the paper it was written on unless the legislature ponied up SOMETHING. But Texas had no money so the university was little more than a dream. One thing the state did have was "public land." As a mostly good faith effort, the state set aside a large parcel of W. Texas land for the future university.

A large portion of land that went to make up the Permanent University Fund (about a million acres) came from land deeded to railroads for right-of-way. The Texas and Pacific RR gave back said 1 MM acres to the state because it was deemed to worthless to survey. It was only good for grazing and not much for that. We're probably talking pennies per acre.

It was more like a gift from God than the citizens of Texas when oil was discovered in 1923. The rest, as they say, is history.

Hook 'em.

If you want to delve into the endowment, check the UT Austin wiki page. I put the story with citations up a couple of weeks ago. In 1858 when the university was established, the legislature granted about 1,000 acres per mile of railroad built in the state to the university. Those were the lands that were part if the railroad right of ways. Those lands were close to populated areas as well as sources of water and transportation. The legislature also gave the university $100,000 cash that during the Civil War they helped themselves to so that by 1865, the university endowment held a whopping fifty seven cents in cash. In 1876, they took back the valuable railroad lands and granted the university crappy lands in far west Texas that were worth 5 cents on the dollar compared what they took away. The legislature has screwed over UT time and again over the years.
In 1916 the governor got pissed when the university wouldn't let him dictate who could and couldn't be a professor at UT. He tried to shut the university down before he was impeached. Political fights over UT and the legislature trying to F@#K UT have been a part of UT since before the university opened its doors.

Bill Powers was a good president of UT Austin because he knew how to play politics. He also just got done raising another $3B for the private endowment (not the PUF). After the recent capital campaign pledges are received, the private UT Austin endowment will approach the value of the total private and public endowments of the TAMU system. 2/3 of the PUF income (the AUF) goes to UT as part of the UT system's overall $16 billion budget. 1/3 of the income goes to the TAUM system as part of their overall $3.6 billion budget. As a percentage of overall revenue, the TAMU system gets twice the public endowment funding the UT system receives. (For the record, $3billion is roughly two and a half times the endowment of OU)

If Bill Powers pissed some people off by the way he played the political game, screw them. I'm not a fan of his not being forthright when questioned about it, but he will have to live with that. A total of 73 students were identified as admitted without sufficient qualifications. If admitting those 73 people over five years was what it took to keep UT removed from Rick Perry's "reforms" and helped raise over $3billion in private endowment funds, then it was worth it.

 

[Growler]

A "tip o' the hat" to Wallace Hall and the fine work done by the researchers and reporters who have brought these shameful, deceitful, under the table dealings to light. Thank God not every lawmaker, BOR member and media outlet were on the take like many apparently were. Hopefully now the State lawmakers and UT Administration will now have to play by the rules they make for the rest of us. The faux impeachment was a joke as the rats scrambled to cover their tracks. They all should have just owned up to it immediately and vowed not to continue, and then lived up to the vow. Regardless of whatever additional motives have been (unfoundedly) attached to Hall and Perry and the others who blew the whistle on this specific corruption, Powers leaving and the public shame now attached to the perpetrators are a temporary black eye that will lead to better days for our University and our students without their presence and influence.

 

[HornNdriftwood]

A "tip o' the hat" to Wallace Hall and the fine work done by the researchers and reporters who have brought these shameful, deceitful, under the table dealings to light. Thank God not every lawmaker, BOR member and media outlet were on the take like many apparently were. Hopefully now the State lawmakers and UT Administration will now have to play by the rules they make for the rest of us. The faux impeachment was a joke as the rats scrambled to cover their tracks. They all should have just owned up to it immediately and vowed not to continue, and then lived up to the vow. Regardless of whatever additional motives have been (unfoundedly) attached to Hall and Perry and the others who blew the whistle on this specific corruption, Powers leaving and the public shame now attached to the perpetrators are a temporary black eye that will lead to better days for our University and our students without their presence and influence.

The only thing you can thank Wallace Hall for is wasting millions of dollars of taxpayer money. Nothing that was not already well known has been brought to light and no policy or policies will be changed because of this.

Powers has followed established policy and his successor will undoubtedly do the same. There is no black eye and no public shame except perhaps that which has been brought about by the occupant of the Governor's Mansion.

Hook 'em.

 

[Randolph Duke]

A "tip o' the hat" to Wallace Hall and the fine work done by the researchers and reporters who have brought these shameful, deceitful, under the table dealings to light. Thank God not every lawmaker, BOR member and media outlet were on the take like many apparently were. Hopefully now the State lawmakers and UT Administration will now have to play by the rules they make for the rest of us. The faux impeachment was a joke as the rats scrambled to cover their tracks. They all should have just owned up to it immediately and vowed not to continue, and then lived up to the vow. Regardless of whatever additional motives have been (unfoundedly) attached to Hall and Perry and the others who blew the whistle on this specific corruption, Powers leaving and the public shame now attached to the perpetrators are a temporary black eye that will lead to better days for our University and our students without their presence and influence.

"Tip 'o the hat"?! How about "shove it up your ass"

"On the take"?!

Exactly who benefited from the admission of the students the report mentioned? Who was on the take?

 

[echeese]

"Tip 'o the hat"?! How about "shove it up your ass"

Someone has a different opinion and this is the response?

It would be nice if this board didn't denigrate into Shaggy Bevo.

 

[duqu]

Someone has a different opinion and this is the response?

It would be nice if this board didn't denigrate into Shaggy Bevo.

for some people this is a political fight, character be damned.

 

[Growler]

for some people this is a political fight, character be damned.

In fairness to Randolph Duke, I didn't take it as him telling me to shove it, rather what he would say to Hall as opposed to tipping his hat. Maybe I'm wrong and it was a personal attack because I don't excuse Powers, Zaffarini, Pitts and others trading votes, protection and favors for personal gain for their kids and agendas just because they are Longhorns. I would hope that our alumni base would be a bit above the hypocrisy of, say, A&M with their "Aggies don't lie, cheat or steal nor tolerate those who do" which they have proven through the years is mere words as they excuse Sherrill and others actions just because they are Aggy. Half our alumni base is behaving more like the groupthink apologists from College Station in their "yeah but the end justifies the means" excuses on this one.

So much of this to me is analogous to the head of a household who gets caught defrauding their insurance company by a Private Investigator. And then the family members all try to discredit the PI and or claim "everyone does it" as a justification to defraud. This is very close to a Nixonian or Obamian "yeah, but when the President does it, then it is legal"...

 

[streettopeschel]

In fairness to Randolph Duke, I didn't take it as him telling me to shove it, rather what he would say to Hall as opposed to tipping his hat. Maybe I'm wrong and it was a personal attack because I don't excuse Powers, Zaffarini, Pitts and others trading votes, protection and favors for personal gain for their kids and agendas just because they are Longhorns. I would hope that our alumni base would be a bit above the hypocrisy of, say, A&M with their "Aggies don't lie, cheat or steal nor tolerate those who do" which they have proven through the years is mere words as they excuse Sherrill and others actions just because they are Aggy. Half our alumni base is behaving more like the groupthink apologists from College Station in their "yeah but the end justifies the means" excuses on this one.

So much of this to me is analogous to the head of a household who gets caught defrauding their insurance company by a Private Investigator. And then the family members all try to discredit the PI and or claim "everyone does it" as a justification to defraud. This is very close to a Nixonian or Obamian "yeah, but when the President does it, then it is legal"...

so i understand, the Pres of the University allowed approx 15 kids a year in (NOT at the expense of any other students) and this is Nixonian?

 

[duqu]

so i understand, the Pres of the University allowed approx 15 kids a year in (NOT at the expense of any other students) and this is Nixonian?

No one said that. Lying about it, oops, "withholding all the facts" (aka, lying by omission, aka lying) is. Although I wouldn't use Nixonian.
Your kid got caught with his hand in the cookie jar. All kids do it and most lie about it. Do you give the kid a pass or do you teach your kid the value of being honest?

I don't want blood, I don't demand anyone's resignation. I'm just embarrassed for both sides in this. Grown men should know better, act better and demand better.

 

[armadillo slim]

tip o the hat?  you must be kidding.  the only thing hall needs is a boot up the ass and a ticket out of town.  thank God we've got a governor and chancellor that understand that finally.  

 

[echeese]

so i understand, the Pres of the University allowed approx 15 kids a year in (NOT at the expense of any other students) and this is Nixonian?

If it's "business as usual". . .why the need for secrecy?

And yes, the way it was handled was very "Nixonian". . . . .

The reality is that it was done to curry political favors. . a quid pro quo. . . .if someone (and clearly a few do) need that concept explained to them. . .they are either dishonest or obtuse.. . .but they have been obtuse in the past.

The other irony, it's not always the Top 5-7-10% kids that are your best students.    In fact many of our most noted graduates. . . would not be alums if the rules of today were applied back then.    I damn sure would not have been admitted (yes, I was admitted WAY BACK when)

I get that strong opinions offend many of you. . . . .but is basic honesty and integrity too much to ask?

And I understand some of you care only for TEXAS and not the rest of the state. . .the irony is that if some of you would "pull the sticks out of your ass". . . you might realize that TEXAS has the ability to INCREASE it's own excellence while the entire state's education system can be improved.

But the parochial loyalty to the university over everyone else in the state seems to lead some of you to selling your souls. . . .or maybe ideas like honesty, public service and integrity are too "old fashioned". . . .. 

 

[streettopeschel]

Of course it was quid pro quo. I don't think anybody is arguing it isn't. Like someone earlier said, he'd have been better off saying 'damn right I did it'

If no other students were displaced, and nobody has said any were, I'll save my outrage for something else.

 

[echeese]

Sorry was too obtuse.  .. 

The claim was made that Powers got nothing in return. . . . .now granted, made by one of our densest members but there was in fact a quid pro quo in play.

Again, if nothing was done untoward. . . .why the need to obscure the issue?   A form of a lie. . .not telling the truth.

I have no real problem with what Powers did but I'm not naive or dishonest enough to try and claim it wasn't wrong or "special privilege". . .but then integrity matters to me.

 

[doc longhorn]

Sorry was too obtuse.  .. 

The claim was made that Powers got nothing in return. . . . .now granted, made by one of our densest members but there was in fact a quid pro quo in play.

Again, if nothing was done untoward. . . .why the need to obscure the issue?   A form of a lie. . .not telling the truth.

I have no real problem with what Powers did but I'm not naive or dishonest enough to try and claim it wasn't wrong or "special privilege". . .but then integrity matters to me.

The need to conceal it was because it was duplicitous and against the rules.  This much is clear. 

But people are naïve if they believe a public and politically funded state school is not a minion of state politics.

Admissions of students, as political favors, has been going on at least since I was in school.  Always has and always will.  In public schools and in private schools as well.

Hell, there is an arrogant and outspoken lawyer, in TOS, that bragged about being admitted this way.

No sense being outraged about it, there is nothing you can do about it.

And, yes, Wallace Hall stepped over the line and is an arrogant, out of control asshole.  His witch hunt has cost the tax payer millions and he is not done yet.  All he cares about is himself and the public be damned.

In the old days, these kinds of arrogant politicians (which is what he is) were run out of town on a rail.

 

[doc longhorn]

I'm not saying that perry is not to blame here. I'm just trying to steer this conversation away from it being a larger nefarious plot on behalf of Texas A&M to somehow damage UT. This is about a rogue governor being advised by a rogue educational consultant making sweeping negative changes to higher Ed in Texas. Making this an A&M vs UT thing diminishes the problem to petty rivalry and precludes our ability to come together to figure out how to fight the changes.

And there are a group of hint profile A&M alums (the kind of folks with their names on buildings) who have expressed significant displeasure over what's going on, but perry is still running roughshod.

I'm bummed to see powers go. He's done great things for UT.

Joe - you are right in saying it's not a UT/TAMU thing.   It is politics - plain and simple. 

School politics were evident when there was discussion about some of the Big 12 schools moving to the PAC - and Baylor wasn't one of them.  The Baylor politicians entered the picture  on this - big time.  But that is another story.

In this case, it is nothing more than Perry trying to ramrod one of his political agendas down everyones throat.  It had nothing to do with trying to degrade UT.

I agree with you about Powers.  We have had far worse presidents at UT.

 

[Randolph Duke]

And I understand some of you care only for TEXAS and not the rest of the state. . .the irony is that if some of you would "pull the sticks out of your ass". . . you might realize that TEXAS has the ability to INCREASE it's own excellence while the entire state's education system can be improved.

Any argument prefaced on the contention that the interests of UT and of the people of the state of Texas are not intrinsically aligned is so misguided as to be unworthy of discussion. 

If anyone wants to claim whether UT and the people of Texas have not materially benefitted from the totality of Bill Powers' contributions to higher education over the past five years, bring it on. I am ready to take the other side of the argument. 

Finally, the"Nixonian" comments are embarrassing in their stupidity. How any supposedly educated individual can claim that the sitting president of the University of Texas used the arms of government to strike out at his political enemies and actively subverted the Constitution to advance his individual partisan political agenda is beyond me. Sometimes I wonder how some of you people ever graduated from college. Bill Powers deciding to admit the individuals at issue is a policy disagreement. Bill Powers was responsible for establishing policy matters. To assert his deciding to admit those students was in any way illegal and connected with an act of constitutional subversion is absurd.

 

[doc longhorn]

Any argument prefaced on the contention that the interests of UT and of the people of the state of Texas are not intrinsically aligned is so misguided as to be unworthy of discussion. 

If anyone wants to claim whether UT and the people of Texas have not materially benefitted from the totality of Bill Powers' contributions to higher education over the past five years, bring it on. I am ready to take the other side of the argument. 

Finally, the"Nixonian" comments are embarrassing in their stupidity. How any supposedly educated individual can claim that the sitting president of the University of Texas used the arms of government to strike out at his political enemies and actively subverted the Constitution to advance his individual partisan political agenda is beyond me. Sometimes I wonder how some of you people ever graduated from college. Bill Powers deciding to admit the individuals at issue is a policy disagreement. Bill Powers was responsible for establishing policy matters. To assert his deciding to admit those students was in any way illegal and connected with an act of constitutional subversion is absurd.

The premise of your argument is correct, if not somewhat confrontational.  It is the rules of admission that are under question, i.e.;  Should political ilk be granted admission privileges the typical pre-admission student does not have?

If, in fact, it is permissible to have these privileges, why the subterfuge?