“Most important crisis at A&M since Earl Rudder”
I received an e-mail from a friend at Texas A&M that consists of an op-ed piece written by Jon Hagler, whose service to A&M includes board chairman of the Texas A&M Foundation and co-chairman of Vision 2020, a long-term project to enhance Texas A&M’s national prominence. He was named a Distinguished Alumnus in 1999. I do not know when or in what publication the piece will be published. However, I am authorized to publish it at this time.
* * * *
Today’s governance crisis at Texas A&M is extremely serious. It may be the most important crisis the university has faced since A&M President Earl Rudder’s challenge to the status quo fifty years ago.
Today’s crisis really isn’t about Dr. Elsa Murano, who has announced her intention to resign as President, or for that matter, Chancellor Mike McKinney. It is about whether an academic institution of almost 50,000 students and 250,000 former students – a member of the Association of American Universities – deserves the freedom to aspire to better things and to manage itself as an institution of higher education. We are presented with a stark alternative: an all powerful “system”, run by political appointees, without legislative oversight, who wish to unilaterally politicize and “corporatize” decision making structure and staffing to their own, and to their political friends, advantage.
Texas A&M University (TAMU) is the “flagship” university of the The Texas A&M System. It is the oldest educational institution in the state. It has almost half of the undergraduate students, as well as virtually all the graduate programs and graduate students, and is responsible for most of the research, in the System. It is the only Tier 1 comprehensive research university in the system and one of only three in the state. Yet, today we find the university being taken over by the system TAMU spawned in 1948.
Nothing could be clearer than the chancellor’s words in a recently released evaluation of President Murano: Murano “built her administrative team to do her instructions. Not team supportive of Ideals of BOR [Board of Regents] (or ideas of BOR).” McKinney rated Murano 1 on a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 being the worst.
President Murano was President of the flagship. The chancellor’s job has always been to worry about the System, not about TAMU. The chancellor’s job has always been a staff job, essentially an extension of the Board of Regents – necessary staff support given the scale and scope of the System and physically and contextually remote from the System institutions themselves. There are presidents – “chief executives” – of every institution in the System: all eleven universities, seven state agencies, and a health science center. The President of Texas A&M has always been a line job, the biggest job in the System.
And yet, the system’s organizational chart puts, incredibly, the Governor in the top spot for the system, the Board of Regents next, the Chancellor next, and the President of Texas A&M at the same level as the Chancellor’s chief of staff, the vice chancellor of agriculture, budgets and accounting, and the presidents of campuses at Texarkana, Commerce, Corpus Christi, and Kingsville.
And, they mean it. The Governor/Chancellor tandem, with the approval of the regents, is appointing and firing executives at Texas A&M, without consultation with its faculty. Indeed, it selected, without any consultation with anyone but themselves, Dr. Murano. It is intervening in faculty compensation. And, it tolerates no dissent.
Want proof? Listen to the Chancellor’s own words on his concept of enlightened and shared governance: “There’s nine people who can tell me what to do. I’ll make my arguments to them. They argue, they listen and then they make a decision and I carry it out. You want shared governance? That’s shared governance.”
Or to those of Regent Gene Stallings: “A lot of that depends on Dr. Murano (on whether she can continue to work with the chancellor). She works for the chancellor. The chancellor doesn’t work for her. Rank and file has its privilege. A colonel can’t tell a general what to do…A chancellor’s job is to run the system. A president’s job is to please the chancellor.”
So, today we have a System empowered by its regents – all nine of whom are appointed by our current governor – to make all critical decisions for the flagship university, as well – presumably – as for all of the other System universities. And, the regents have delegated that responsibility completely to one person, a non-educator, a politician who was not selected through a national or even regional search. One person agreed with himself that Chancellor McKinney was the choice: his former boss, Governor Perry, for whom he had served a stint as chief of staff.
No, this crisis is about whether the faculty, staff, students, former students and the broad and diverse community that make up Texas A&M University will allow a handful of politically motivated persons who do not understand their fiduciary duty either to the institution or to the citizens of the state to take over this wonderful, heavy-duty public university – this sacred public trust. If they are successful, Texas and its citizens can kiss a unique American institution goodbye. It will have no chance of ever achieving its vast potential.
Jon Hagler
Class of 1958
* * * *
Mr. Hagler does not exaggerate. The management structure of Texas A&M is of the politicians, by the politicians, for the politicians. The governor’s reach into the A&M system is the sort of thing that can make it impossible for A&M to recruit top faculty and administrators. No one is going to relocate to a university that is rife with political interference.
Tagged: board of regents, chancellor mike mckinney, elsa murano, jon hagler, regent gene stallings, rick perry, Texas A&M.
Texas Aggie says:
Perry and his cronies are quickly pissing of the Aggie faithful with their politics. Without a resignation from McKinney, this former Perry supporter will be pulling the KBH lever. A&M deserves better leadership than the incompentent hacks we currently have.
Reply »
BJT8691 Reply:
June 15th, 2009 at 1:16 pm
Kay Bailey is worse than Perry, we need a better alternative than either one of them
Reply »
A Perry Casualty Reply:
June 15th, 2009 at 9:53 pm
Keep your eye on the ball!! The ultimate goal, above all others, is “ANYBODY BUT PERRY!” He and his minions are a slimy bucket of evil. Not just Aggies, but all of Texas deserves and should demand better than this.
Reply »
cow droppings Reply:
June 16th, 2009 at 10:19 am
I have noticed a ratcheting up of rhetoric by Perry opponents. It means one of two things: either they have discovered they are losing after underestimating him once again going into this election cycle, or they feel like they need stronger adjectives because the facts are not strong enough to make their case.
Reply »
VeryConcernedAggie says:
The top administrators at the A&M System are very mean and vengeful people who, beginning in the 2004-05 academic year and continuing through today, have made a regular practice of making all decisions based on what Perry wants. In fact, applicants for A&M System positions are asked during their interviews whether they will do the bidding of the Governor’s office. Perry’s “people” at the A&M System have been extremely incompetent, insensitive hatchetmen who do not care about the quality of education at A&M. Instead, they want to have control for their own devious purposes and find ways to give “credit” to the Governor. They have no problem ripping people’s reputations to shreds in order to keep control. I am so sorry that the A&M community has to experience the far-reaching repercussions of their actions. I also hope that the media and bloggers begin delving into all of the “smoke” that is coming from all of the fires that Perry, the Regents and McKinney have set with the A&M System. There are some eye-opening (and scary) stories there.
Reply »
Austinmom says:
I have a child who has expressed an interest in A&M – as well as Rice, and a few other top notch science and engineering schools.
I had presumed that the choice would be A&M – as a state school – but this has me rethinking whether or not to even consider writing a check for the application fee.
After all the discussion of Tier 1 institutions in the just finished session, it seems a shame to think that Perry and the Regents are willing to gamble with A&M.
Reply »
Aggie '06 Reply:
June 15th, 2009 at 9:38 pm
As a recent former student and employee of the university, I must encourage you to reconsider your reservations. Yes, the governance of the university is in termoil. I think that politics will exist in any system. The faculty of Texas A&M are STRONG. The majority have voiced their support for the president and dissatisfaction in the Chancellor. The faculty WILL be heard. I am confident that the faculty run the university and keep it running by bringing in research dollars. The faculty should be your focus, not the governance. The quality of the faculty at A&M is incomparable to any other school in Texas, in my opinion. Your son or daughter will get a great education. It will take more than just Governor Perry and his Possy to take down a University with the history, support, and tradition that A&M has.
Make a trip to Aggieland…you won’t have reservations after that.
Reply »
SpeedyMom Reply:
June 16th, 2009 at 3:35 pm
Yes, the faculty are strong, talented and accomplished. But the culture always comes from the top down, not from the bottom up. McKinney & Co. are squashing the faculty in every which way possible if faculty programs go against their vision (whatever that may be) — or, sadly even more frequently, if faculty don’t kowtow to them. As VeryConcernedAggie note — if faculty don’t (or won’t) give credit to the System, Regents or Governor for successful programs, they soon find themselves marginalized.
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
June 16th, 2009 at 7:18 pm
more accusation without evidence. Standard m.o. of critics of the board and chancellor.
Anonymous Reply:
June 17th, 2009 at 9:49 am
Isn’t it spelled “turmoil” and “posse?” –UT grad with reservations
Reply »
DM says:
I think I read this in the Bryan/College Station Eagle newspaper, or at least parts of it.
Reply »
paulburka Reply:
June 15th, 2009 at 9:41 am
It may have been published already. If so, I haven’t seen it. It was sent to me by a former administrator for publication in the blog.
Reply »
bud Reply:
June 15th, 2009 at 7:21 pm
Mr. Burka,
Was it former A&M President Ray Bowen who sent Mr Hagler’s op-ed to you ? They appear to have been acting in tandem to thwart Dr. Murano’s demise.
Reply »
dedicated faculty member says:
Does anyone have a suggestion for how to fight this kind of behavior?
Reply »
bud Reply:
June 15th, 2009 at 7:18 pm
Me Burka,
Was it former A&M President Ray Bowen who sent Mr Haglers op-ed to you ?
Reply »
MGG says:
Hagler is completely on-point with this. But I would have liked to have seen more as to what an actionable solution could be. When a govenor is pulling the strings, do all Aggies just join Kay Bailey’s campaign in an effort to get him out? (Let’s ignore the irony of working to elect a UT grad over an A&M grad for the betterment of A&M). Of course, then his cronies on the BOR just plug him in as president and things get even worse. So what’s the solution?
Reply »
dedicated faculty member says:
MGG–that’s my concern also. Is there any concern that KBH would allow Perry to be in the upper admin of TAMU–President? Chancellor? As a UT grad, how much will she care about the future/reputation of TAMU?
Reply »
MGG says:
dedicated faculty member – One of the theories is that Perry doesn’t seek re-election and is put in place by the BOR before the ‘10 election. I’m assuming the Lt. Gov would just rubber stamp it at that point. I just don’t see him giving up the governor’s office that easily though unless it’s obvious he’s not going to win.
As far as KBH, I wouldn’t worry too much about her not doing what’s best for A&M. And you can almost be certain she wouldn’t do the stuff Perry has done like place unqualified people in positions of power based on their loyalty to him(i.e. McKinney as chancellor, Stallings on the BOR, Webber as VP of Student Affairs, etc.).
Reply »
dedicated faculty member says:
Thanks MGG. It does seem that theories abound… So then one can hope that even if it is rubber stamped… KBH will/could clean out the BOR, and the rest will follow? Can the BOR be cleaned out before their terms are up–or does she need to wait and then replace them? Sorry for my obtuseness here–Texas politics is all new to me! But I’m quickly getting up to speed!
Reply »
Dr. Peggy Love-Clark says:
I will never be ashamed to be an Aggie but I am ashamed of Rick Perry. In a need to further his own interests, he seems to have forgotten what it means to be part of the 12th Man and our tradition of Aggies looking out for other Aggies. In response, all Aggies everywhere should rise up and make their opinions known. In agreement with other loyal former students who have already spoken out, we need to tell Mr. Perry and his associates that this is not about politics. It is not even about football or Saturday night at Northgate. It is about the future of a beloved and revered institution that those before us believed in and trusted that we would continue its mission to educate and care for all those that followed. Please join me in putting all the politicians on notice that we will not allow a small group of self-serving individuals to diminish the integrity and reputation of the place that is known as Texas A&M University.
Peggy Love-Clark, Ph.D.
Classes of ’73, ’81 and ‘84
Reply »
Hubert Wilson says:
When Elsa Murano was appointed to her most recent FORMER position, I sadly predicted something like this would happen to this fine institution, students and its supporters. With all the political ‘double dealing’ and intrigue nearly a year and a half ago, I penned the following ‘earthy’ assessment.
“The Pretty and The Stink”
http://www.ilovepoetry.com/viewpoem.asp?id=94081
A sad, sad day for Texas A & M!
Reply »
Prince Royal Reply:
June 15th, 2009 at 3:13 pm
Hubert-
What is happening in Aggieland is ugly enough. Introducing doggerel poetry into the mix is not helping.
Reply »
MGG says:
dedicated faculty member – No problem. I honestly don’t know term limts for the BOR but I believe they serve two terms (I’d guess four years each… I’m sure it’s online somewhere). Everyone currently on the BOR was selected by Perry. My fear would be she would have a lot more to think about than the A&M BOR and the damage Perry caused with all his cronies. It would probably take a powerful anti-Perry Aggie to be in her ear and influence her decisions. Paging Mr. Hagler?:)
Reply »
paulburka Reply:
June 15th, 2009 at 3:17 pm
Regents are appointed by the governor to six-year terms, subject to being confirmed by the Senate. A regent may be reappointed when his term expires, but he must be confirmed again.
Reply »
Anonymous says:
Not sure that it is a good idea to just have tenured faculty types in positions of power at A&M. We might start getting liberal, pantywaists coming out of College Station that we are getting out of Austin these days.
Reply »
VeryConcernedAggie says:
I would suggest that A&M funders, whether they be individuals (such as Mr. Hagler) or foundations (such as the Houston Endowment, Meadows Foundation, etc.) can exert enormous pressure on the Chancellor and Board of Regents. I hope they do so.
Reply »
Texas Democrat says:
I think McKinney will find a way to be President of Texas A&M University some how, since Perry and his cronies are acting like the Iranian government with vote rigging, disenfranchising folks, etc.,
As for Perry, he’s STAYING in the governor’s mansion and IS running for reelection to a 3rd full term in 2010 and you can bet his camp will find some damaging dirt on KBH during the GOP primary and if that means manipulating votes to get him reelected, so be it.
Reply »
Emeyekaye says:
So, if we Aggies want to protect A&M, we will be forced to see that he is elected to some office somewhere?
Note to Perry or his lackeys who read this blog and report back to him: “Sit down bus driver!”
And, if the above does not work, then try this on for size:
“Riffety, riffety, riff-raff!
Chiffity, chiffity, chiff-chaff!
Riff-raff! Chiff-chaff!
Let’s give ‘em a horse laugh:
Sssssss!”
Now go away or I will taunt you a second time (let’s see… can I remember the Pass Back for “beat the hell…?”)
Reply »
Texas Democrat Reply:
June 15th, 2009 at 11:42 am
Can you imagine the horror of the American people IF Perry somehow wins the Presidency against Obama in 2012 ?
I can see it now across the Nation: LORD HELPS US ALL.
Reply »
Harry Doghiney (D-TX) says:
Can you imagine the horror of the American people IF Perry somehow wins the Presidency against Obama in 2012 ?
An Aggie Republican president? Revelation says that’s a sign of the apocolypse.
Reply »
Texas Democrat Reply:
June 15th, 2009 at 11:59 am
Harry, Obama and Co., are hoping that Perry is the GOP nominee in 2012 so that the President can pick apart Perry’s governorship, etc.,
Reply »
Dub Maines '84 Reply:
June 15th, 2009 at 4:51 pm
By the way, do the Democrats hope Perry is the 2012 Republican Presidential nominee as fervently as they hoped Reagan would be the 1980 nominee? Be careful of what you wish for — sometimes you get it.
Reply »
Nancy says:
Mike McKinney has always been a bully. I don’t know any of the facts, but when I saw his name that is all I needed to know.
Reply »
cathy loving says:
I wish someone with connections would contact George H Bush fast! . He, more than anyone else in this community, might be able to put a stop to Governor Perry’s shenanigans. After all, his library is here. And he and Barbara love what Texas A&M stands for. Surely they don’t want to see this turmoil continue.
As a faculty member who is struggling right now to attract distinguished faculty from other universities to serve on our departmental self-study, I can feel the cascading effect of our decline.
Reply »
Jim '63 says:
McKinney and Perry are on the road to implementing Vision 1920 at A&M.
Jon Hagler has already said that he is closing his checkbook to A&M, and for what little difference it makes, so will I, until integrity is restored to the Univeristy. That would probably have to include the resignation of the entire Board of Regents.
Reply »
Former 2%-er ('85) says:
Dr. Gates – A&M needs you more than the Defense Department does! I’ll write a letter to President Obama requesting your reassignment. –Seriously– No leader has embodied the Aggie Core Values like Dr. Gates. Excellence, Integrity, Leadership, Loyalty, Respect, Service — these are in his DNA. Under his leadership, Vision 2020 was made a priority (and it wasn’t even his idea! He didn’t have to clean house and mark his territory — he was secure in his abilities to continue his predecessor’s important work). Now, the joke is “Vision 1920″ –sad, but true! What worries me most is what Austinmom said above. At its current state, who would want to send their kid here? And, as the Faculty Senate pointed out — what talented individual would want to work here? I have one suggestion: the two powerful positions of chancellor and TAMU president are too big for one town. A&M System office should be centrally located, to reinforce the notion that it serves ALL system entities. According to the Texas Almanac, about 15 miles northeast of Brady, TX is where the System office should be located.
Reply »
Dan says:
It is the process that is disturbing. If Dr. Murano were really doing a bad job as president, wouldn’t we have specific evidence laid out to document this? What we have is an evaluation that McKinney scribbled out in five minutes because he was PO’d that Murano not simply a yes-man?
Reply »
Texas Democrat says:
I don’t see Gates going back to A&M until after Obama’s first term ends in 2013-assuming Obama gets reelected in ‘12 by then.
Reply »
Dan says:
McKinney and the Board of Regents are certainly free to do what they want, but just like people are free to go stand in the middle of the road, there are likely to be consequences. The consequences with a university are different from those in most businesses, because faculty are more mobile than most employees and the better faculty are extremely mobile. Good faculty in many areas bring in more grant money than their salary; I know I do. The administration can treat me badly or ignore me completely if they wish, and they can hire Dr. Joe Blow to teach my classes after I leave. However, Dr. Blow will not bring in the million in grant money, nor do I think he will teach as well. That is the choice to be made; I will be ok either way. I would prefer to be loyal, but in exchange I would require a little respect.
Reply »
LisaM Reply:
June 15th, 2009 at 12:52 pm
This mornings BOR meeting was a joke. First agenda item – how much it costs to run TAMU relative to the rest of the system. Emphasis placed on all the money spent hiring faculty, the “high personnel costs” associated with this growth (and lip service paid to the commensurate growth in enrollment). In slide after slide of “revenue sources” – NOT ONE mentioned research grants, indirect costs, salary savings! Not ONE. Yeah, I get the hint BOR. I was hired three years ago, covered 1/2 my salaries in grants within a year of my arrival, FULLY FUND a dozen students (doctoral, masters and undergrad), but you don’t think people like me are worth the investment. Ok. I’ll leave and take my funding elsewhere. Good luck trying to keep this place a top research institution.
Reply »
MGG Reply:
June 15th, 2009 at 2:16 pm
LisaM-
I watched it as well and was shocked as well. Although I don’t know why I would be surprised a 70 year old football coach like Stallings would have trouble understanding intricacies of something like this. So ridiculous unqualified cronies like him are on the board. Again, thank you Rick Perry.
Reply »
cow droppings Reply:
June 16th, 2009 at 10:21 am
so, go ahead an justify tuition going up more than twice inflation from 2000 to now. Go ahead an justify operational costs going up nearly $300 million in five years. Go ahead and justify Ray Bowen making more than $280,000 TO TEACH ONE CLASS. Go for it…let’s see you defend that.
Reply »
DH Reply:
June 16th, 2009 at 10:29 pm
You apparently believed the voodoo financial statistics presented at the Monday regents meeting to try and make the System look great and TAMU like spendthrifts. Among other things, the reason that operating costs have rising is that student population, credit hours and *research* funding have risen. No faculty member was fooled by the BS presented at the meeting, but sadly no regent seriously questioned it, except Gene Stallings asking if it meant the faculty weren’t working as hard as they used to.
aggie retiree says:
I’m delighted to see this and the other press about this debacle finally getting out all over the state. Let’s hope that Aggies everywhere rise up and get McKinney out. Having said that, I don’t expect it to happen. The board will do whatever the gov wants, and he wants his pal in place. The writer who pointed out the cronyism and incompentence of Perry’s ‘pals’ at the System is right on target, but neglected to note the enormous salaries they are getting–NOT earning–just receiving. Those of us who spent our careers at A&M are as devastated as the former students. I wish I saw, as we used to say, some ‘light at the end of the tunnel.”
Reply »
Blue says:
The problem with A&M as a system is that, with the exception of the College Station campus, the other schools are small and have little political clout. The continuing proliferation of “systems” in name only–Texas Tech, UNT, Houston–will open the door for even more machinations of this nature.
Reply »
Tom '65 says:
Damn it, I am sick and tired of the continuing destructive political interference in the operation of Texas A&M. It’s a great institution and doesn’t deserve this kind of malfeasance. Maybe it’s time to throw the (politician) rascals out again!
Reply »
NotAnAggie says:
So, we’ve got UH and other institutions seeking to be Tier 1. Maybe Texas will get a third Tier 1 institution, after UT and Rice, some day. Not going to be A&M any time soon.
Reply »
Andrew says:
This was published in the B/CS Eagle.
Reply »
oopsie says:
There is a new aggie joke
in Aggieland :
The board of regents’
new goals is for the
University to be reach the
“Vision 1920″ milestone.
Reply »
Bill D says:
McKinney has staff at the Office of Technology Commercialization, namely Guy Dietrich, who is a close friend of Perry. Guy and has staff routinely try to strike deals with companies and faculty members and leave the University administration out of the communication loop. One such deal, Lexicon Genetics went south and lost a lot of money. Guy D. tried to put the $100K+ write off of that company on the University’s tab and is still trying to do so. The Chancellor also hired Brett Giroir as the Vice Chancellor for Research. This is who he and the board were wanting for the VPR position. I can’t imagine what he makes. Giroir is genuinely trying to do a some good things, but this position was not created before and therefore is an added cost to the TAMU System. I can’t imagine what Guy D. and the whole OTC make. Guy has caused more headaches by trying to broker horrible deals on behalf of the University when he has no right to and then put the tab on TAMU when it goes bad. Guy D., McKinney and Perry are making decisions for the University based on their own business dealings and wanting to run it like their own personal business. Someone please investigate Lexicon genetics, and Xerion and investigate McKinney, Dietrich and/or Perry’s involvement with these companies and why they are pushing so hard for the University to finance $60M+ deals with these shady groups that inevitably have ties to all three of these people. Oh…and do a public records request on the performance eval for Guy and the OFfice of Technology Commercialization that the CEOs did last year. They scored worse than Dr. Murano did, but the difference was their low scores were actually warranted. INteresting how McKinney hasn’t railed them in the paper and no one has done anything about their drain on tax payers money.
BTW – The next president of A&M will be Michael Moseley
Reply »
Prince Royal Reply:
June 15th, 2009 at 3:23 pm
The dude who shipped the nukes to Taiwan?
That would be awesome. Continue placing people in power that do not respect the faculty and then bring in someone who would not know management if it was in front of him to carry out Dr McK’s instructions.
If only they would micromanage the sports programs as well, UT could win 25 in a row in football.
Reply »
aggie Reply:
June 16th, 2009 at 11:19 am
Look at other Perry appointments and you will see these same tactics & motivations–specifically Tx Education Commissioner since he was first elected. He names an excellent, capable, & intelligent person to do the job. Says “I did it first.” (First Hispanic, First Woman) Then ties their hands, knock them down & out and moves on. He has done the same at Texas A&M to a competent and capable lady just trying to do her job. He and McKinney need to get out of Texas politics and TAMU. I have no idea where they should go–No place should have to put up with them.
Reply »
Robert says:
Ummm, it’s a publicly owned and run university. It is political by design. Go to a private institution if you think politics should not play a large role in governance.
Reply »
1393574|=|= Reply:
June 15th, 2009 at 6:05 pm
“Go to a private institution if you don’t want politics.”
LOL. Just look at what Robert Sloan did to Baylor in the lay 90s/ early 2000s.
Reply »
Austin dissident says:
Hooray for McKinney! I find it amazing that the governing body of a premier state university would be criticized for actually managing the school instead of rubber stamping the decisions of the administration. The Board of Regents are appointed by the Governor for this very purpose. Unfortunately, the vast majority of Regents see their appointment as an end in itself and are happy to sit, dumb and happy, enjoying their perks and enabling the latest pc drivel in higher education.
Reply »
Tellnitlikeitis Reply:
June 15th, 2009 at 2:50 pm
Those who have known Mike since his days in the state House – 1980s – would generally characterize him as a bully and a jerk.
Forcing out the president is not a surprise. That’s what you would expect from McKinney.
Reply »
Dub Maines '84 says:
Here are a few things to think about. (I’m not attacking/defending either McKinney or Murano here). Everyone keeps mentioning that McKinney was a politician with no experience. Kind of like Gen. Rudder or Gov. Ross? Also, as to the combining of the offices of President & Chancellor, they have been, in effect, combined a great deal of the A&M System’s existence, most notably, during the tenure of Gen. Rudder when he was President of A&M and of the A&M System.
Also, I hate to bust of few y’all’s bubbles, but A&M is a state agency. There will always be politics involved. There are going to be people who support each other because they like and believe in each other. Likewise, there are going to be those who don’t support each other because they dislike and don’t believe in each other. Get over it. It’s called The World.
As to whining faculty, that’s what faculty do. They whine about the students. They whine about the former students. They whine about the administration. They whine about the regents. They whine about the size of the football stadium. They whine ad infinitum, ad nauseum.
Finally, for those of you who think A&M would be better off with an ex t.u. cheerleader as Governor, as opposed to an Aggie, HAVE YOU LOST YOUR MINDS??? Has politics and not getting your way 100% of the time totally clouded your judgment?
This isn’t the point of my response, but I’m voting for Perry just like I (along with a majority of Texans AND Texas Aggies) have done every time he has run statewide starting with Ag Commissioner in ‘90. Perhaps that is another thing that some need to get over.
Reply »
Prince Royal says:
Uhm, Dub? The majority of Texans did not vote for Perry last time. Didn’t you hear? 39%. Perhaps with Aggiemath, that is a majority, but in the real world, we call that a plurality.
It is the thinking of Aggies that an Aggie governor would be better for their institution than someone else that got them in this situation in the first place.
Do faculty whine? Sure. Not all, and not all of them often. And given the propensity of faculty to not pick their battles, they can sounds a bit like chicken little. But A&M is NOT a state agency. It is an institution of higher education. Its governance is designed not to be dependent upon command and control executive power, but appointment of regents over time. That was properly envisioned in the state constitution. It just so happens that Perry is the first governor who has been around long enough to appoint all the regents at least once. Shame the state constitution didn’t term limit governors as well.
Reply »
Dub Maines '84 says:
Prince,
You are correct on majority vs. plurality in the 2008 election. I thank you for your correction. Would you concede that Perry has won every statewide election in which he has run?
As to everything else, you are wrong. Obviously, the A&M System is a state agency, and is governed like most state agencies. That it is also an institution of higher education in no way diminishes the fact that it is a state agency. Elections have consequences, and wishing for anti-democratic mechanisms like term limits will not change that. Perry has won and will win again.
As for “this situation” that you mention, what is it??? Is it bad? Is it scary? I’m very satisfied with where A&M is and where it appears to be going.
By the way, “to not pick” is a split infinitive. Naughty, naughty! Me being nit-picky like that is kind of petty, isn’t it?
Reply »
Prince Royal Reply:
June 15th, 2009 at 6:49 pm
Not only that, but I would concede that Perry did a pretty good job in the positions before Governor. I also believe he is a much better candidate than you are, Dub. But fortunately, that district has returned a solid Aggie to DC.
As Governor, Perry has done a poor job. He has instituted a spoils system for his people that places lap-dogs where leaders should be.
“This situation” is one where A&M will be on the cover of the Chronicle of Higher Education about the drama that is playing out. The Aggie academic brand is being sullied by this publicity. It is bad in the sense that it is unnecessary and does not honor the institution.
But since you are satisfied with where A&M is going, would you care to inform the rest of us where it is that they are going?
You get an “A” in English, but will need to retake Government. A&M University is a constitutional educational institution. State agencies are a function of the executive branch and that section of the constitution. (FYI: The Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board is a state agency.) If A&M were a state agency, it would certainly be listed on the state web site where Perry has blessed us with his picture, don’t you think? http://www.tsl.state.tx.us/apps/lrs/agencies/
Reply »
Dub Maines '84 Reply:
June 15th, 2009 at 10:35 pm
You found me! Good for you. I guess that’s because I’m not hiding behind a pseudonym, nom de plume, alias or whatever the modern semanticist is using these days.
Reply »
Prince Royal Reply:
June 16th, 2009 at 7:47 am
Two questions remain, Dub:
Where is A&M going?
Do you still maintain it is a state agency?
Dub Maines '84 says:
Whoops. The “2006″ election.
Reply »
Texas Democrat Reply:
June 15th, 2009 at 4:12 pm
Dub Maines ‘84:
Perry has won 5 consecutive statewide elections as Agriculture Commissioner (1990, 1994), Lieutenant Governor (1998) and Governor (2002 and 2006), plus once the hard core Religious Right and Dixiecrats come out in droves for him in the GOP primary in 2010 against KBH, Perry will get reelected to a 3rd full term and serve that term from January 18, 2011 to January 20, 2015.
I’m staunchly AGAINST term limits, if you don’t like the person who’s representing you, vote them out in the next election, and those who are doing a good job, stay there for life (see Bill Hobby as Lieutenant Governor, 1973-1991 and Robert S. Calvert as Comptroller, 1949-1975).
Reply »
Dub Maines '84 says:
Texas Democrat,
I couldn’t agree more with all you say. Perry will stay because he is doing a good job.
Reply »
Tellnitlikeitis says:
Perry will probably win the primary. Yes, he’s never been defeated in an election…and KBH has a glass jaw.
It’s gonna be a brutal and bloody primary. Assuming a Perry win, will the KNH supporters come around in the fall? Don’t count on it.
You could have a similar situation that existed in 1978 when GOPer Bill Clements benefited from the disaray on the Demo side after the Dolph Brisco and John Hill sides tore each other up.
Perry could be very weak in the fall. Perry fatigue could be another factor.
What will the national mood be? Will the economy have turned around? Will the jobs market be thriving?
Too many questions to know the answers re. the governor’s race right now.
Reply »
Texas Democrat Reply:
June 15th, 2009 at 5:11 pm
There is a book called, “Twilight of the Texas Democrats: 1978 governor’s race”, which is very good if you read it someday, and I agree that the Texas GOP BETTER take notice on what happened when Briscoe and Hill destroyed each other causing Clements to strike for the kill.
IF the Texas Democrats nominate former US Ambassador to Japan and Australia Tom Schieffer (D-which is more LIKELY), he MIGHT have a shot in the general election…..but it won’t be good enough for him to knock off Perry, winning a 3rd full term by 8-10 points.
Reply »
DM says:
TAMU and the System are vastly larger than the last time the chancellor and presidency were combined. No knowlegeable person would suggest that they could be combined today. The regents essentially said the same thing today.
A university system chancellor is traditionally a former university president. Look at the UT system chancellor. McKinney has no such experience, and it shows. He was put in place to be Perry’s lap dog. Murano was forced out because she wouldn’t be a lap dog, although she did give in on Weber, so she could keep VPR.
This situation is very damaging to A&M in that it will make it very difficult to recruit and retain top-rank faculty and administrators. I’m sure the regents can get plenty of applications for “Perry lap dog wanted, $350k/year”, but not many Texans would consider that a good use of their money.
Reply »
JohnB says:
Jon Hagler is right on the money. Maybe we should get him in as Chancellor… oh, wait…he called out the Governor. Since when did he do anything for the good of someone else?
Reply »
Class of 95 says:
It is a strange world when I am praying for a former longhorn cheerleader to become Gov. I have more confidence that she will straighten this train wreck out than Perry will.
Reply »
Texas Democrat Reply:
June 15th, 2009 at 5:14 pm
Class of ‘95, don’t be so sure about KBH, because she has a GLASS jaw like Hillary has and Perry will bloody her so bad, it won’t even be funny in the GOP primary, which you will see more negative attack ads like the 2002 Perry-Sanchez contest, where both embarrassed the entire state.
Either of them could be WEAK and there will be GOP fatigue here sooner or later, plus Schieffer will say, “16 years of GOP rule is ENOUGH….20 years is too damn long.”
On the 1978 race that somebody mentioned earlier, had Briscoe won the Dem nomination, he would have easily beaten Clements and won a 3rd term, serving until 1982, but John Hill got uppity and couldn’t resist his ego.
Reply »
Dr. Emily Clark says:
I am a fifth generation Aggie and although Mike McKinney would like to believe that he is accountable to no one other than the Board of Regents and Rick Perry, he is ultimately accountable to the Students, Former Students, and all of the Aggies who have come before us because that is what Texas A&M is built upon. We cannot let him or what some may call inevitable politics run our school. It is and will always be OURS. That is what makes Aggieland extraordinary.
Dr. Emily Clark
Class of ‘96 and ‘99
Reply »
Caldonia says:
I am not an aggie but have been around the State Capitol for many years…..those in this blog who think that a major STATE University like A&M should not be subjected to politics are just naive….and over all, A&M has reaped tremendous benefits from their powerful political clout over the last 100 years.That is the real world…. and most faculty members (not all) have no concept of that.
Reply »
VeryConcernedAggie Reply:
June 16th, 2009 at 6:35 am
Hi, Caldonia,
Respectfully, I’d counter that within the last decade the A&M System has included both Republicans and Democrats who were high-level employees within the System. These were educators, not political types and they were focused on the quality of education provided to students. That has changed. And if you are a long-term employee who doesn’t support Perry (and who doesn’t credit the Governor publicly for any successful program, even if he had nothing to do with it), you are ousted immediately with your reputation shredded.
Reply »
Texas Democrat says:
Didn’t Bill Clements cause controversy at SMU despite the football team scandal during his tenure as governor, which led him not to seek reelection in 1990 ?
Reply »
Tellnitlikeitis Reply:
June 15th, 2009 at 6:14 pm
He never planned to run again in 1990; he simply wanted to get revenge against Mark White….payback for 1982.
Yes, he was on the SMU board that paid off football players, resulting in the NCAA death penalty.
Clements’ classic explanation: “There was no Bible in the room.”
Or, something to that effect to explain why they sanctioned the illegal payoffs.
Reply »
dedicated faculty member says:
Most interesting–and most distressing–in the comments that support McKinney, the BOR, Perry, and the business/politics as usual approach to the university, is the utter contempt for faculty. Not surprisingly, this contempt also displays a lack of knowledge about what we do and what our responsibilities are in the academy.
Reply »
Dub Maines '84 says:
Attached is a 5-year old article from the Batt about Jon Hagler of Dover, Mass and Vision 2020. The Vision 2020 committee was created as an advisory group to the Board of Regents in order to advise the Regents on a long-term strategic plan. This was either the 3rd or 4th major effort of this nature since I was made an Aggie in 1980. For all I know, we were in the middle of one back then, as well.
It never fails: A strategic planning committee is formed. They work very hard and with much dedication. They present their plan. The Board rejects, doesn’t act on, or modifies the vast majority of it. The advisory committee forgetting that they were never more than advisory, becomes outraged. The committee, being intelligent and pure, denounce all actions of the the stupid and venal Regents. The newpapers write about this contest between purity and venality. The story goes away. A&M continues to grow and prosper.
From all I can read about Mr. Hagler, he is a very good man and a very dedicated Aggie. That makes him neither right all of the time, nor now.
Reply »
Sad in Aggieland says:
Mr. Hagler is right on the money and such a wonderful friend to the University. Unfortunately, the pressure from the stakeholders has simply shifted the system plot from moving the chancellor to manage the university to moving all of the university decision making to the Chancellor and trying label it shared services for cost cutting. HOGWASH! No matter what….. the chancellor will get control of the university’s resources, the university’s research faculty, the university’s research programs, contracts and indirect costs, which is all he has ever desired in order to get the faculty in line with the governor’s idea of what they should be doing. Sad day… but the shared services rhetoric is hogwash….. This plot will be implemented by System lackies that will do whatever the Chancellor says on shared services and will move all of the management of TAMU to MM. They have won …………until KBH is elected
Reply »
VeryConcernedAggie says:
The consolidation of services is described in the following:
http://tamus.edu/regents/agenda/SharedServices.pdf
I find it interesting that the Regents, Chancellor and other System staff just made the System bigger staff-wise. They portray it as “cost-cutting,” but it’s all about control. Most organizations (such as school districts) get clobbered publicly for having a top-heavy administration. Well, the System is now top heavy, but portraying this as becoming “more efficient.” I sincerely doubt that their explanation is the real reasoning behind this edict.
Reply »
cow droppings Reply:
June 15th, 2009 at 9:51 pm
get your facts straight. Look at the documents on the system site: number of executive staff in the system has gone down. Shared services will lead to further cost reductions. I have never seen so much baloney in comments of a blog than I have read in this one.
Reply »
VeryConcernedAggie Reply:
June 16th, 2009 at 6:42 am
Actually, the effort toward shared services will increase the number of staff members at the System level in order to manage the multiple entities at the universities and also will substantially increase System administrative salaries. Plus, there will be added inefficiencies in this top-down approach. Just getting anything through the System’s legal department currently is a nightmare (and that’s been centralized for a very long time).
Reply »
cow droppings Reply:
June 16th, 2009 at 10:24 am
you are making a bunch of assumptions without facts. Why do you assume combining services in each case will result in the system having the personnel and not the university?
There are a lot of accusations being thrown out by critics without a modicum of evidence. If you want to justify students having to pay more than twice what they paid just nine years ago so Ray Bowen can make $280,000 to teach one class, or so we can hire more than 300 faculty without changing the professor to student ratio, go ahead.
But let’s try to deal with actual facts and not assumption, presumption and innuendo.
DH Reply:
June 16th, 2009 at 10:39 pm
The real goal of Shared Services Initiative is to get control of research administration, so that the System can skim off indirect return. McKinney made a stab at this last year. If you tell Aggie alums that the System wants to take money away from A&M, they immediately understand why this is a bad idea.
If Shared Services was truly focused on increasing efficiency while not reducing service quality, such as in HR functions, and it properly included *all* stakeholders in the discussions, then there would not be faculty opposition to it. After all, increased efficiencies in services benefits the faculty too.
Conservative Texan says:
There is not another major state university in the country that is used as a political playpen by the state’s governor. Just when you think Perry has exhausted his ability to embarass, he comes up with something else. Did you see the AA-S video of Perry’s press avail at the Alamo today? When the subject turned to A&M, he looked like a kid caught with his hand in the cookie jar again, and couldn’t even look his questioners in the eye. Perry is generally shameless, so you know just how bad this one is when even he becomes red-faced.
KBH has a long record of supporting higher education. Not just UT, but every school from community colleges to the big systems like A&M and Tech. She also supports private schools, SMU and Rice and Baylor and the smaller colleges. She personally founded an organization to boost hard sciences in Texas. These are not political claims: they are facts. Virtually any college administrator, or board member in Texas will confirm this.
Dub Maines, my hat is off to you for using your real name. But you are one hard-headed dude, just like your boss, Rep. Joe Barton. I know you Aggies stick together, and I suppose that’s commendable, too. But Dub, we’re talking about the future of Texas here. It’s serious business. Perry doesn’t have leadership ability. He’s all politics, no effectiveness. He’s leading conservatives in Texas over a cliff. Democrats would rejoice if Perry is renominated, because it would give them a good chance up and down the 2010 ticket. Wake up and smell the coffee.
Reply »
Dub Maines '84 Reply:
June 15th, 2009 at 11:10 pm
I want to clarify a few things. I have nothing whatsoever against Dr. Murano. I have met her several times and like her very much. I have offered no opinion here as to her job performance. I’ve also met Dr. McKinney a time or two, and did not notice the evil that has been often mentioned here. I have not offered an opinion on his performance, either. I speak here only as a citizen of Texas, an Aggie, and a fan of Governor Perry. As for his leadership, check out a few recent articles in the WSJ on Perry and the status of Texas vis a vis most other states right now. Finally, Congressman Barton can and does speak for himself. That is neither my job, nor my desire.
Reply »
Prince Royal Reply:
June 16th, 2009 at 8:30 am
Thanks for the clarification. One more clarification–when you are posting during daytime hours, is that on my tax dollar?
Reply »
Resident Advisor says:
I am class of 09′ at A&M, and I have to say that Mike McKinney, the Reagents, nor Perry are accountable to the students at A&M. There are too many instances where the students’ best interest and opinions have been ignored. The students votes mean nothing anymore, and we do not have the power to bring change alone. This university USED to be about the students and for the students. Now the university is centered around politics and faculty. I’m just glad that I won’t be here to see the fall of A&M. In all honesty, if Murano wanted to do what’s best for A&M, she would speak up about the Perry conspiracy and sacrifice what power she has left to destroy his reputation and credibility.
Reply »
Concerned Texan says:
President Murano was set up for failure from the get go. Unfortunately, A&M will never compete with The University of Texas at Austin or any other tier 1 institutions because of their old school mentality of being sexist and racist. It’s in their DNA and that will never change until they open their minds!
Reply »
cynic on the floor says:
The seeds of the destruction of Texas A&M were planted and well fertilized by former Aggies and the political hacks it spawned and employed. It is yet another sad day for education in Texas and for Texans.
Reply »
John Cobarruvias says:
All Aggies have to do is withhold their donations till Mike McKinney is told to leave.
Reply »
VeryConcernedAggie says:
Gov. Perry does have a “caught in the headlights look” …. as well he should. Watch the Statesman’s interview (and take it with a grain of salt):
http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid1494874918?bctid=26401703001
Reply »
Buck says:
This is all really good news for Texas Tech.
Reply »
1393574|=|= says:
LOL at the Joe Barton staffer!
Also, “go to a private institution if you don’t want politcs in the administration…” Really?
Just look at the liberal purge at Baylor during the early 2000s, led by President Robert (Bobbyboy!) Sloan..
Reply »
Anon says:
http://vision1920.blogspot.com/
Reply »
DH says:
Resident Advisor, Dr. Murano was doing the best she could. She had so many bad ideas coming at her from Perry/regents/McKinney that she had to pick and choose her battles. Thus accept Perry buddy Weber in return for not losing research. The faculty and students didn’t realize at the time what was happening. Now we know, and my appreciation for her has gone up.
Reply »
Bill D Ag 48 says:
As a vet of WWII, a 5th generation republican, conservative, and 3rd generation Texican, I can tell you I have seen a lot of idiotic leadership at A&M. Jarvis Miller comes to mind as well as Gibb Gillcrest. But. nothing beats the childish behavior of Perry, McKinney, and the BOR. I have been blessed to have known great leaders. Men and women who put the needs of others before their own needs. Leaders who understood the meaning of humility, integrity, and sacrifice. And leaders who paid the ultimate price for the greater good. Perry, McKinney, and the whole BOR have no clue what it means to be a real leader. I sickens me to think of those good men(many of them Aggies)who died around me in the hill towns and mountains of Italy, thinking that they were fighting for a future world where leaders would act responsibly and maturely. I would remind Dub that he needs to grow up and reflect upon his cavalier and adolescent statements that only serve to inflame those of us who were privileged enough to have served under real leaders of character. Last Summer I visited the children of my company commander in Italy. He never thought of himself, only of his men. As we were taking severe fire from enemy positions, he was mortally wounded. Not realizing he was hit, our unit continued the fight and eventually over ran the enemy’s positions. The next morning, the mules were recovering the bodies off of the barren mountain slope where the fighting had taken place only the day before. We all recognized the body of our Captain on one of those mules as the morning sun was beginning to break the darkness of the night. One by one every man on the side of that mountain silently removed his head gear, approached the Captain, and reached to touch his body. In that moment, I realized the weight of his responsibilities as a leader and the enormous sacrifice he made for us. If our current A&M leaders are going to continue to function as they have been, then they need to step aside and let those who have integrity and humility have a go at it. In particular, I am disappointed at Coach Gene. You have no business serving as a regent. Every time you open your mouth, it is an embarrassment.
Reply »
Former 2%-er ('85) Reply:
June 17th, 2009 at 5:48 pm
Bill D Ag 48, thank you for your service to our country and for writing this post. If we had leaders with your integrity, I would never have been a 2%-er in the first place. It’s hard to stand behind this great university when it means supporting the types of “leaders” we have now. As Shawn Stevens points out, you have given this issue some perspective. I hope the ones who need it are reading …
Reply »
D. Shawn Stevens '86 says:
Bill D Ag 48:
As a 5th generation Texan grandson of a WWII infantry platoon leader during D-Day, Battle of the Bulge, etc. (and as a 1st generation Democrat myself for what it’s worth) my hat’s off to you for a stunningly sobering post that puts the sad and pathetically cliche power plays of the Perry/McKinney/BOR cabal in the perspective it belongs.
I’m not holding out much hope, but maybe the embarrassment of this sordid episode will lead to some real adult behavior in the decision making to come.
Perhaps I’m a bad Ag for the time being, but I made the difficult decision to stop my very modest giving to the Association of Former Students a couple of years ago (hopefully temporarily), largely because of the extreme pandering to and cheerleading for Perry. In my opinion, he is embarrassing us as Texans and as Aggies.
There are a lot of us out there that would give back a lot more to the University if it wasn’t as politicized as it is right now. If A&M is to maintain and enhance its reputation as an institution, then Perry needs to “give us room”.
Reply »
Anonymous says:
Dub maines ‘84 do not respnd to Texas Dmeocrat’s comments – that only encourages it to stop taking it’s medicine, therefore the hallicinations take over and the Orderlys have to put it in a straitjacket.
Reply »
Good Mamas don't let their babies be Aggies says:
What is the point of this blog – if a Texan wants a real education they go to the University of Texas – not Texas Agricultural and Mechanical.
“How do you tell an Aggie graduate? The bottom of their shoes has the phrase ‘This end up’ printed on the sole.”
“Then there was the Aggie who drank so much Fresca that he thought he was going to snow in his pants.”
“What happened on the Aggie’s Wedding night? Nothing. He kept waiting for the swelling to go down.”
Reply »
paulburka Reply:
June 16th, 2009 at 9:26 am
I strongly disagree with this comment. Texas A&M is an excellent university. The faculty is strong. The research base is very broad. Texas A&M does a lot of things better than UT does. Students are less likely to fall through the cracks there. Loyalty to the institution is greater than at UT. (Many UT students identify with their fraternities and sororities before they identify with their university; that doesn’t happen at A&M.) Alumni giving is more widespread and more generous. A&M is different because it is a land grant college, and land grant colleges have a service mission as well as an educational mission. A&M has an agricultural extension service and an engineering extension service, each of which can be found in many communities across Texas. It is limited by being in College Station (harder to attract single and minority faculty members), and by the tension between those who place academics ahead of spirit and those who do the reverse. It’s a peculiar place, and a unique place, but it carries out its educational mission extremely well.
Reply »
dedicated faculty member Reply:
June 16th, 2009 at 9:48 am
Thank you Paul Burka. I am a relatively new faculty member at TAMU. I have taught at several other colleges and universities–public and private. By far, these are the best students I have taught: they are smart and more importantly, they really *want* to learn and are willing to do the work to achieve that goal. They are extraordinarily polite (not to be underestimated) and I deeply admire their commitment to service. This faculty is also the best faculty with which I have worked–they are excellent. I am far to the left politically, but I prefer my conservative hard-working students to many others I have taught previously. I am hopeful that TAMU will work out its current problems–I have no desire to leave TAMU or Texas.
Reply »
Blue says:
What I never understand about these situations is why someone in a position like Dr. Murano resigns. Everything is public, her opponents have leaked and whispered without her having a chance to respond.
Why wouldn’t she go to the chancellor’s meeting armed for bear and ready to kick, scratch, and destroy all the SOBs who put her in this position? She gets absolutely nothing by resigning under fire when it is unjustified.
Reply »
Prince Royal Reply:
June 16th, 2009 at 8:33 am
I predict that one of the private foundations attached a check to the resignation agreement.
Reply »
DH Reply:
June 16th, 2009 at 10:48 pm
It was $800-some thousand with a year of sabbatical. Interesting is that a few hundred thousand is so that she won’t sue.
Reply »
DH Reply:
June 16th, 2009 at 10:46 pm
Because fighting to the end would not be in her interest, nor that of A&M. Given the inevitable outcome, it is best to just negotiate a settlement and let the university move on. She did the best she could in an untenable situation, and she can be proud of the fact that she protected A&M for a least a time from some of the System nonsense.
Reply »
paulburka says:
Re Blue’s point, above:
Murano has a tenured faculty position, to which she has the opportunity to return. She resigned the presidency, but she remains on the faculty. She knows she is dealing with vengeful people. Why would she risk losing her faculty position?
Reply »
Blue says:
It is precisely because she is tenured that she should go down swinging, Paul, particularly if she has dirt on McKinney and the rest of his crowd.
Reply »
Been there Reply:
June 16th, 2009 at 10:22 am
Blue, is the view nice from the cheap seats? When you have encountered the beast up front and personal like Dr. Murano, then you can have an opinion on how she should have fallen on her sword. But I assure you that you can’t write fiction as grotesque as how these people operate in real life.
Reply »
long island gal says:
Murano may have contributed some positive things, however with her rating so bad, it would definitely make her positive contributions invisible. Now that she resigns, we’ll just hope that she will be in good condition.
Reply »
Another Aggie Faculty member says:
Why should she wreck her chances of getting a high admin job at another university, when the rest of the TAMU community was showing such tepid support for her? The Faculty Senate couldn’t even bring a vote of no confidence in McKinney to a vote while she was still in office.
The faculty should refuse to serve on any search committee for her replacement while the current Chancellor is in place. We should decline to participate in any planning for A&M’s future until we have credible assurance that it’s not just window dressing.
But I predict we won’t do either of those things in sufficient numbers for anyone to notice.
Reply »
DH Reply:
June 16th, 2009 at 10:50 pm
I think this is unfair to the Faculty Senate. At the time of the Senate meeting, no regents meeting had been scheduled, and the chancellor was scheduled to meet with the Senate executive committee. So the feeling was that it was better to see how the meeting with the chancellor went, rather than taking a vote beforehand. I would be shocked if we don’t have a no confidence vote now.
In any case, I don’t think a no confidence vote would have changed the outcome, since Dr. Murano was negotiating the settlement the day after the Senate meeting.
Reply »
Concerned Voter says:
Let me issue a challenge to every facet of news media in Texas. Keep up the good work! Please, don’t let up. Perry and his team have given you an extraordinary plethora of episodes to write about. Don’t let the public forget any of them. Part of the phenomena that occurs is that they create so many messes, then writers and readers are always moving on to the next ordeal, allowing the voters to forget. How about you dig them all up and hammer continuously until the primary election….and God help us onto the general if that’s what it takes. Some of the stories may be old news, but so what. Now is the time to drag up everything that Perry is responsible for, and keep the voters aware as we go into the next election year.
I don’t care if he is replaced by Kay, Kinky, Carole, Tom, or whoever…..ANYBODY is better than what we’ve got. He and his cronies must be stopped, and we need to get busy as soon as possible with efforts to rebuild Texas. And we also have a responsibility to save the nation from this poison if we possibly can, since what he’s really after now is the Presidency of the United States.
Reply »
Anonymous says:
There is a lot of innuendo in the comments on this blog…too much bull to respond to in one message.
But a couple things need to be cleared up. First, as much as the faculty wants to claim their sacrosanct search process was discarded, their leader at that time…Mr. Slack…pulled a fast one.
They claim three viable candidates were sent to the board. WRONG. One had withdrawn, and a second didn’t even meet the criteria they had established at the beginning. That left precisely ONE candidate to choose from. In other words, it was take our pick, or we will scream about the abandonment of shared governance. This was a tremendous disservice to the board, and they had every right to go a different direction.
Secondly, shared governance happened in the last pick. The faculty had their input. The regents made a different decision (for reasons mentioned above.) They don’t want shared governance…they want institutional control.
A&M is bigger than the latest dispute. it will recover from this, and wounds will heal with time.
There are a lot of overly dramatic statements about how we will never be able to hire qualified faculty again. I would suggest the critics of McKinney and the board have engaged in a ton of hyperbole. It is a great institution that will continue to attract great minds. Period.
Reply »
DH Reply:
June 16th, 2009 at 10:55 pm
That is not how McKinney told the story yesterday. But relatively close. He essentially claims that two candidates dropped out and the third wasn’t qualified. I would say the last is the fault of the two regents on the search committee, whose job was to make sure the committee produced candidates acceptable to the board. The proper thing to do in this situation would have been to ask the search committee to keep on searching, or else constitute a new search committee. Eddie Joe was doing okay, and I didn’t feel any urgent panic to hire.
Note that this almost exact situation happened with Murano being hired as dean – the other two candidates dropped out within a few days before the regents meeting.
Reply »
Texas Democrat says:
Governor Perry just signed the eniment domain bill yesterday, still wearing a cast on his right arm, due to his biking accident last week.
Reply »
Another Aggie Faculty member says:
I find it amusing that Anonymous starts his post about bull and innuendo by making an unverifiable accusation against the integrity of Dr. Slack. If the Regents who were on the committee were too weak willed to resist his Jedi mind tricks even after months of reporting back to the full BoR, maybe they don’t belong on the BoR.
The faculty position at the time was that it was always the Regents who had to make the final hiring decision, but that they should have sent the charge back to the committee, or formed a new committee.
The best thing A&M has going for it right now is that the economy is hurting our competitors more than it’s hurting us. That will let us hire and keep more faculty than we would otherwise. But by not even doing a better job of faking shared governance – which isn’t that hard to do – the BoR and Chancellor have made it harder and more expensive. Anonymous probably hasn’t served on a search committee in a competitive field. I have, and I’ve seen A&M lose out to inferior institutions because of our public image as a backwards place. I’ve seen it happen because the candidate’s wife isn’t comfortable about what she reads about Texas A&M. We’ll still be able to hire and retain, we just won’t hire and retain as many of the kind of faculty that would make us the institution that the kids we teach and the taxpayers of Texas deserve.
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
June 16th, 2009 at 1:42 pm
It is a fact that only one viable candidate was given to the board. Talk to any nine of them. They had the integrity not to pour out the members of the committee and air dirty laundry publicly (apparently faculty does not feel the same constraints.)
To send the same search committee back to the drawing board, after they had botched the search, and delivered their candidates months late, was untenable. The Regents didn’t control that committee. I know you think you know what happened, but it didn’t happen that way.
Some faculty/presidential material will not come to A&M, but that is a political philosophy issue. A&M is more conservative than most faculty. Some adapt to it, others never give it a chance. For some reason, liberal faculty are not content that 99% of American institutions are controlled by their political soulmates…they need to make A&M like the rest.
The definition of shared governance is not ceding one’s authority to make the faculty happy. That is the faculty definition.
Reply »
DH Reply:
June 16th, 2009 at 11:02 pm
Any faculty will tell you that “shared governance” will mean university administration getting input from all stakeholders before making important decisions. This seems to work reasonably well within A&M. Why is it so hard for it to work at the System level?
Oh yes, if the faculty are unhappy, they leave.
Reply »
Texas Democrat says:
Concerned Voter,if Perry and his cronies have their way (see Iran mess) you and everyone else BETTER get used to seeing him in the Texas Governor’s Mansion for awhile until January 20, 2015 when he finishes his 3rd full term after 14 years in office.
Just got a feeling the hard core Religious Right will come out in massive droves for Perry, pushing him over the top in his bid to be the state’s 4th governor to serve 3 terms.
Reply »
Anonymous says:
It’ past lunchtime, Texas Democrat, time for you medicine to contain your hallucinations…
Reply »
Bevo says:
An Aggie had just completed his studies and was awarded a BS Degree in mechanical engineering. He was immediately hired by the Texas highway department.
His job was to paint the yellow stripe down the middle of the highway. After three days, his boss called him in and advised him that he was no longer needed.
When the Aggie inquired as to the reason for his dismissal, the boss replied, “On your first day here, you painted three miles of stripe, which is good. On your second day, you painted two miles; not as good, but still acceptable. Today, you only painted one mile. This is too far below our standards.”
The Aggie accepted the explanation, saying on his way out the door, “Well, alright, but I want you to know, it wasn’t my fault. The paint can kept getting farther away.”
How do you get a Texas A & M graduate off your front porch? Answer: You pay for your pizza!
What do you call a female Aggie who takes birth control pills? Answer: A humanitarian.
Reply »
paulburka Reply:
June 16th, 2009 at 4:12 pm
I want to distance myself from this view of Texas A&M, however amusing to some that it may be.
Reply »
Blue says:
Been There, actually I have been on the receiving end of a Perry jihad. That’s part of why my advice to Murano would be to fight back until the last dog dies. In the long run, Perry’s people won’t go any easier on her for rolling over (although perhaps as alluded to above there was some financial considerations given to her).
Reply »
close source says:
some things need to be said, but that chancellor and regents won’t talk about publicly:
Fact 1: Murano told the regents and the chancellor that she would hire Dr. Giroir as the head of research at A&M and went back on her word. Giroir is a one of a kind biodefense mind and highly qualified. Murano broke the Aggie Code of Honor.
Fact 2: McKinney didn’t make the performance review public, nor intended it to be the subject of public controversy. The system was required to release it, and it was friends of Murano who tipped the press off to ask for it under open records. She asked for this public scrutiny.
Fact 3: while the board and chancellor have refrained from publicly commenting on the set-up job done by the last search committee, you can expect that to change because now that they will have to initiate a new search process, they will feel the need to set the record straight on the last one to take air out of the balloon that they were the ones who violated shared governance when in fact it was the faculty head of the search committee who did so by giving them a choice of one candidate.
Reply »
SpeedyMom Reply:
June 16th, 2009 at 3:44 pm
Regarding “fact 2″ — OF COURSE, Murano wanted this hatchet job to be made public. It was the ONLY way she could clear her name. It wasn’t enough that McKinney could simply remove her from her office — he always has to annihilate people. Victory with honor is not in his skill set.
Reply »
DH Reply:
June 16th, 2009 at 11:08 pm
Regarding Fact 1, the faculty wouldn’t accept someone as VPR who doesn’t believe in basic research and whose sole focus seems to be commercialization.
Reply »
Buck says:
If we’re going to start enforcing the Aggie Double-Secret Code of Honor, then we should start with the governor.
Reply »
DH Reply:
June 16th, 2009 at 11:08 pm
And ask him to remember his duty as an Eagle Scout too.
Reply »
Another Aggie Faculty member says:
close source:
Regarding “fact 1″: If true, the BoR didn’t have to approve Seeman less than a month ago.
Regarding “fact 2″: So a completely unprofessional hatchet job is OK as long as it doesn’t become public?
Regarding “fact 3″:I hope they try to sell that;it should be amusing. It’s their own public remarks that make people believe that they violated shared governance, not anything us whiny faculty have said.
fwiw, I’m not a liberal, either.
Reply »
Another Aggie Faculty member says:
p.s. thanks for confirming that the System wanted to impose Dr. Giroir without a search. Some of the other apologists are denying that.
Reply »
anon says:
Fact 2: McKinney didn’t want it to be public…
so that’s why he wrote it in crayon…. and at kindergaten level…
Reply »
close source says:
Murano made a commitment on Giroir. If I were her I would have done the search and then made sure he was chosen. She chose to do a search, and then not keep her word.
Would that be a sham search? Perhaps. Welcome to higher ed. And let me suggest: if you were an AD and Urban Meyer came knocking on your door, you may do a sham search, but you hire Urban Meyer. Brett Giroir is a one-of-a-kind. She should have kept her commitment.
McKinney rectified her treachery by bringing Giroir on at the system, where he is doing groundbreaking work. And he and Seeman are on the same page. Good has come from that particular instance of bad faith by Murano.
To another point: call McKinney’s evaluation unprofessional if you want, but that is a focus on form instead of substance. You will not here this chancellor air a bunch of evidence on her for the good of the university. She was not forced to make this public to defend herself. Her hot, over-the-top response did not help her case. She showed complete disrespect for chain of command, and yes at Texas A&M we still respect chain of command.
As to the regents dismissing the search committee recommendations, that is not a violation of shared governance. The commitment to shared governance is to listen to the input of stakeholders. They did that. They disagreed. In fact, they made a statement that we will not cede our authority by being force-fed only one qualified statement.
Some in faculty are trying to change the definition of shared governance, and make it such that regents must accept the recommendations of stakeholders. Then why have regents?
Hysterical rhetoric by critics of the board and chancellor aside, they have exercised their authority as written in statute. They have refrained from making public comments to malign either Dr. Murano or those who criticize them so openly, even when their statements are completely untrue. Some of you would scream bloody mruder if they came out and said Murano is a liar and Slack set them up. You would say it is unbecoming of a high-level university or system official. They have refrained from such, and all they get is unmitigated grief based on false rumor, innuendo, etc.
Someone show me who here has violated the Aggie Code of Honor besides the president, and some in faculty who have distorted the facts.
Reply »
jdunn Reply:
June 16th, 2009 at 7:27 pm
Close source-you obviously do not understand faculty and the value of a legitimate candidate coming from a search committee. Just look at Bob Gates. He came from the faculty search committee and the Board appeared to hate him. He got in by one vote. In fact, they bashed his popular and visionary reinvestment initiative just this week.
Searches will produce the right candidates for the University. They can lead because they will have the respect of the faculty. Also, do you think Seamann and Giroir will still be on the same page after Giroir steals all university research administration and decision making from the VPR and takes it to the system. Everyone knows that the decision has been made by the Chancellor to use our beloved Research Foundation in the sinister plot to strip the university of all authorities. The team leader has already announced the results of the res adm study (RF and TEES) to his employees as pre-determined by the Chancellor. The committe has not yet been named and supposedly the Board assured there would be faculty senate representation on it. Why should anyone waste time on these committees? Why did the BOR simply not put up a slides that read “strip the VPR and the University of all resarch administration duties”. TAMU will teach. System will do research. Shame on the RF that I have loved for so many years for not being true to Texas A&M. This was never just a discussion of best services and shame on you for not having the sense to see what you are doing to the University.
Reply »
Anonymous says:
Word to the wise: avoid A&M and Aggies at all cost. If you can’t get into UT, there’s always the Texas State University system.
Believe me any kid would be better off at Sul Ross in Alpine than putting up with all the crap you read here about College Station.
Reply »
Texas Job Grower says:
What to do with that Aggie diploma:
Lift Lid
Drop into bowl
Pull down handle
FLUSH
There, that’s better….
Reply »
Another Aggie Faculty member says:
I’m sure glad we have leaders who are so savvy that they could be set up by Murano and Slack. I hope you’ve explained to them not to reply to those emails from Nigeria.
Reply »
Anonymous says:
This is just a big ruse to open up an escape hatch for Perry. Perry gets his cronies (McKinney and Board) to oust Murano then hire Perry. No primary battle. Perry lands on his feet in a cush job. Manufactured serendipity.
Reply »
anon says:
A centralized research bureacracy is problematic. You can win big…and you can lose big.
Better to have worthy research projects bubble up from faculty rather than top down from the administration, which appears to be the plan.
In fact, the best research universities (private and public) conduct most aspects of higher ed decision making from faculty to the administration–and consensus is built among all involved.
This top-down authority is more a community college approach.
Reply »
anon says:
or High School……
Reply »
Been there says:
Blue, Sorry you also were a victim of one of Perry’s jihad’s, as you put it. I still would contend, though, that fighting to the death of the last dog (again, your words, not mine) is a wreckless way to go in many, if not most, instances. Some of it is personal, sure, but what is likely true for all of us is that we would not have fought at all if we had not been a part of something we felt to be very important work from a public service standpoint. The continuing fight cannot serve the entity. Would A&M be better off right now if Dr. Murano were still sluggin’?
Reply »
Future Careerist says:
“Hello, welcome to Denny’s. My name is Elsa, would you prefer your Iced Tea to be sweetened or unsweetened? Our special today is Dixie Pirg Bar-B-Q with a heaping side of college president.”
Reply »
Xred says:
One more fact on the failed Presidential search.
After the search committee screwed up the search,
Interim president Ed Davis who had done an outstanding
job (including dealing with similiar System interference
with professionalism), had the support of Aggies and enough
Regent votes. In a last minute unexplained move, Perry instructed them to vote for Murano.
Stallings stood up(”we had a better candidate!”) and the other 8
caved. Look where Texas A&M is now….thanks to our
“Aggie Gov” Rick Perry.
Reply »
Former 2%-er ('85) says:
Good point, Xred! That little detail has been missed in all this.
Reply »
77M80 says:
Rumor has it that the single candidate remaining from the three recommended by the search committee was a minority woman from a north-eastern institution. Anyone know whether or not that is true?
Reply »
Harley The Aggie Hog says:
Underlying this controversy are two larger issues transcending individual politics and personal agenda, sociopsychology, race and gender sociopathology and flaws in vision and management skills.
It is an issue of the future of universities Universities (TAMU among them) that have been historically the fountain of novelty, creativity, skepticism of status quo and accepted dogma that is necessary for the progress and survival of mankind. See D. Clawson, (2009) Tenure and the future of the University. Science 324:1148.
The trend since the ’60’s is to turn universities into Henry Ford type corporate assembly lines of mindless robotic faculty turning out duplicate mindless robot products for profit making of management that can be controlled in mass by the government and those in power.
With the corporatization thinking comes the delusion that the university can participate in competitive marketing of products in the for-profit arena by forming partnerships with for-profits. Currently in vogue is the lure of marketable technology and biologicals and pharmaceuticals driven by the overblown explosion of genetics and associated technologies.
Both the corporate educational mill and the technology assembly line is at the expense of basic and unfettered academic pursuits and associated training of young minds and thinkers for the future.
Although Texas A&M is only a part of this 40 year trend, it is ironically as predicted for Aggies far behind and inept so far in playing the corporatization game, which if structured and staffed properly in respect to expertise and accountability be of potential benefit to taxpayers of the state and the people in general.
Unfortunately the A&M record in recent years of ventures fueled by the current System Chancellor and Board of Regents more or less so far seems three boondoggles. Most recent is Perry-backed ETF funded ($50mil) National Center for Therapeutics Manufacturing whose for-profit partner Introgen went bankrupt soon after the announcement (http://governor.state.tx.us/news/press-release/12115).
Before that was the Texas Institute of Genomic Medicine (TIGM)-Lexicon boondoggle (http://www.tamus.edu/systemwide/05/08/features/tigm.html). Lexicon took its $35 million and ran delaying a tanking bottom line for several quarters http://www.lexgen.com/news/lexicon-pharmaceuticals-provides-clinical-pipeline-update-and-reports-2009-first-quarter-results.html). The touted independence of System-managed 5013c TIGM after mismanagement and audit (http://www.theeagle.com/local/Audit–Genome-center-in-peril) quickly became dumped on TAMU, leaving A&M holding the depleted empty bag, obligations to the State for jobs, based on a failing, non-competitive and rapidly becoming obsolete technology. The venture continues to be a resource sink for internal resources of the A&M System.
The third venture not yet in the limelight as a clear boondoggle, but deserving of intense scrutiny and accountability as well as cost effectiveness is the Texas Institute for Preclinical Sciences (TIPS) (http://governor.state.tx.us/news/press-release/3039).
In concept these ventures could be productive if they were placed in the hands of the best faculty and academics with expertise to carry them out. Unfortunately, they are put in the hands of administration and management who know little of how to make them a success and now these will be part of the System under the politically-appointed and motivated unskilled. Most often as not once the System level management has made a mess of the ventures from the onset, their for-profit partners have taken their money and run, the remnants are left with those within A&M who hope to salvage a few dollars for their own limited interests and agenda. Then finally there is left an unfunded shell venture left to languish and soak up funds that could have gone to better purposes.
Beyond the A&M examples, the entire ETF program is fatally flawed because it is largely carried out behind closed doors without adequate academic and industrial expert peer review. It is rife with handouts to questionable programs based on political smokescreen and politics rather than future potential. The world is now watching whether the State Cancer Prevention Research Institute will suffer the same squandered fate and waste of the tax money of Texans.
From Down on the Animal Farm 1984
Harley The Aggie Hog
Reply »
baddog says:
My son is set to begin a PhD at Texas A&M in the fall after completing a master’s at an out-of-state institution. I wish now that we had not encouraged him to come back to Texas for his doctorate. A&M is going to drop like a rock in academic standings.
Reply »
Jerry Jeff says:
Mama don’t let your babies grow up to be Aggies…
Reply »
anon says:
Baddog…
I wouldn’t worry too much about the grad programs..most are solid and immune from the politics (unless they are directly related to some of the Perry boondoggles).
It’s primarily the undergraduate ranking that will suffer. Watch the US News rankings in the Fall for any significant shift (A&M currently at 64). I know, I know. . . US News is more of a beauty contest; however, parents look at those.
There was already a slight drop after the controversial Presidential search. I predict a drop of 2-5 places which is no big deal. Anything greater than that, well …there will be lots of finger pointing. Still, A&M should feel lucky at 64 with a 76% acceptance rate. That’s Backwater U. territory.
Reply »
Dennis Alexander says:
Texas A&M is not the “oldest university in the state” by a long shot. I don’t know where that came from.
A&M commenced operations in 1876. TCU opened for classes in 1873. There was no Texas A&M University at that time. Baylor preceded both by a considerable margin, being chartered by the Republic of Texas and commencing classes in 1845.
Texas A&M is older than the University of Texas. But TCU and Baylor are older than Texas A&M.
Reply »
Anon4 says:
Why does the chairman of the A&M Board of Regents have an office on the A&M campus? He is housed in the same building (Rudder) as the Office of the President.
Reply »