This column originally appeared on The Denver Post’s PoliticsWest.com on May 27, 2009.

Money talks … But what about Pueblo?

By Jessica Peck Corry

After posting record fundraising numbers in the last quarter, freshman U.S. Senator Michael Bennet should take a moment to kick back with a Coors. Pete Coors, that is.

While Bennet earned not a penny from donors in Pueblo, Greeley, or Grand Junction in the last fundraising quarter, he brought in more than $400,000 — or nearly a fourth of his total yield — from California, New York, and Washington, D.C.

If there is anything this political newcomer should understand from Colorado’s last few election cycles, it’s that Colorado voters don’t like feeling like their vote is being bought.

Yes, money matters, but it’s all about how that cash is spent that really counts. Reflect for a moment on Coors’ failed 2004 U.S. Senate bid. As Business Week recalled in 2004 of his successful primary race against former Congressman Bob Schaffer, “Coors trounced Schaffer the old-fashioned way — with tons of cash. In the last two weeks of the primary race, he lent his campaign $400,000, which helped pay for 400 red-white-and-blue billboards and a TV ad blitz that described his humble beginnings — if sweeping floors at the family brewery qualifies as humble.”

As history would have it, however, things went south for Coors in the general election against Ken Salazar, who was described by Business Week as “a populist who polishes his man of the people image by holding ice cream socials, touring the state in a dusty green pickup, and talking about growing up poor in a farmhouse with no electricity. With a résumé that includes securing water for rural communities, Salazar is strong in Colorado’s usually reliable Republican countryside.”

Bennet, a millionaire with East Coast roots, can’t rewrite his personal history of Ivy League schools. Based on Coors’ example, it would be a mistake to do so. Raising tons of cash remains the next best thing he can do, but he needs to make inroads into southern and western Colorado to win in a state that still sees Republicans and Democrats evenly matched in numbers.

If Republicans play their cards right, this could be extremely difficult task in 2010. Bennet’s success will likely largely depend on who the GOP puts up to challenge him. In the race thus far are Weld County District Attorney Ken Buck and Aurora City Councilman Ryan Frazier. While Buck has drawn national attention for his efforts to crack down on illegal immigration, the 32-year-old Frazier is seen as a rising star willing to take on any political challenge —including unions, racial stereotypes (he is black), and the endless government appetite for more tax revenue.

Republicans could also likely benefit from another party member who could help sew up support in western Colorado. State Senate GOP Leader Josh Penry, also 32, who is expected to announce his gubernatorial candidacy shortly, has the potential to bring out young campaign foot soldiers in his Grand Junction home district. Should Penry run, he’ll face his former boss and Congressman Scott McInnis, who also represented the district and has already announced that he will challenge Gov. Bill Ritter in 2010.

Regardless of the outcome—and barring a Denver-based Republican jumping into race against Ritter—Republicans will boast at least one major candidate who comes from an area of the state where Bennet has rarely stepped foot. That being any square foot outside Denver.

Jessica Peck Corry (Jessica@i2i.org) is a public policy analyst with the Independence Institute in Golden, Colo., where she specializes in civil rights, higher education, and property rights.

This column originally appeared on The Denver Post’s Web site on May 6, 2009
Available at http://www.denverpost.com/search/ci_12300524

An academic arms race
By Jessica Peck Corry

At the Independence Institute, we’re tough on the University of Colorado, questioning excessive spending, censorship in the classroom, and political bias.

But now we’d like to praise CU President Bruce Benson for taking a fiscally responsible step by cutting some salaries as a way to help mitigate anticipated tuition increases. Still, much more work needs to be done.

In March, we wrote to Benson, calling on him to cut CU’s six-figure salaries by 5 percent. A similar proposal backed by leading Republican lawmakers, including Senate GOP leader Josh Penry and Sen. Bill Cadman, followed as an effort to alleviate a $1.4 billion state budget gap.

The estimated savings to taxpayers: as high as $4.5 million. Unfortunately, the proposal was rejected by Democratic leadership.

As part of Friday’s announcement, Benson presented an alternative plan, saying CU will cut 54 administrative positions, shutter a faculty newspaper, and implement 5 percent cuts to salaries for top officials, including his own. The move will save $6.3 million in administrative costs. But now CU must cut an additional $23 million to balance its books for the coming school year.

The weakest part of Benson’s plan is that the 5 percent salary cut is limited to presidential, vice presidential, and chancellor salaries - saving only about $155,000.

In the last three years, CU’s budget has ballooned from $1.9 billion to $2.4 billion, with raises eating up much of the total. Between 2006 and 2009, CU’s three chancellors received a collective annual taxpayer-funded raise of more than $500,000. And even after Friday’s cuts, Denver Chancellor Roy Wilson could still make over $700,000 this year.

Students have been forced to foot the bill through skyrocketing tuition increases. CU-Boulder undergraduates saw an average tuition increase of 9.3 percent this year; in Denver, the average was 8.5 percent; and in Colorado Springs, 7.5 percent. These increases followed 2007-2008 hikes ranging from 7 percent at CU-Colorado Springs and 14.6 at CU-Boulder.

CU Regent Tom Lucero voted against the tuition increases, saying Friday, “we’ve clearly got to cut more waste before we go back to Colorado’s working families and ask for more money. The time is now to get innovative.” Lucero faces an uphill battle.

As economist Richard Vedder, an Ohio University professor who once taught at CU, points out, “There is an academic arms race going on and everyone is trying to stay ahead of their peer institutions; like arms races in the real world, they cost an awful lot of money. Everyone has this vision they want to move to next level and can be the greatest thing between Berkeley and the East Coast.”

Certainly CU is not alone in its aspirations. Other universities have also implemented extravagant raises in recent years. According to the Chronicle of Higher Education, the average public university president now makes $427,000 a year (more than Benson’s $359,100 base salary).

But times are changing as institutions, both large and small, today pursue meaningful salary cuts. It’s a smart political move. As a recent Business Week report articulates, “Given an economic climate in which tuition is outpacing inflation, endowments are plummeting, and colleges are pleading for more government aid, the public may sour on (high compensation).”

Faculty at the University of North Carolina will take pay cuts after the state legislature cut $150 million from UNC’s budget; Idaho State University anticipates an across-the-board 10 percent pay cut; news reports and blogs suggest that New York University is moving toward a nine-month compensation model that could cut some salaries up to 25 percent.

Voter outrage over Cal State vice presidential salaries averaging $225,000 (below what multiple CU vice presidents make) led Lt. Gov. John Garamendi to call for executive pay freezes.

According to CU’s salary database, just over 2,000 of its 14,901 employees receive an annual base compensation of over $100,000. Tack on fringe benefits, which range from 17 to 27.7 percent, and it’s clear that the total number of individuals compensated in the six figures is more than 3,000 — about one in every five employees.

A few years ago, CU might have been able to effectively argue that it needed to raise salaries to compete with the nation’s best. This just isn’t the case today. As students face the threat of yet another tuition increase, faculty and staff should be expected to do their part by taking modest pay cuts.

Jessica Peck Corry (Jessica@i2i.org) serves as director of the Independence Institute’s Campus Accountability Project and is the author of “An Academic Arms Race: The Catastrophic rise of taxpayer-fund salaries at the University of Colorado and its peer institutions,” available at www.IndependenceInstitute.org.