Minneapolis Star Tribune, Dec. 11
Nation well-served by House investigation
Impeachment process has given Americans much to ponder as high-stakes vote looms.
This country now finds itself, for only the fourth time in its history, confronting articles of impeachment that charge its highest elected leader with violating both the U.S. Constitution and the oath of office to uphold it.
In the months leading up to this, it should first be said, the House has gone about its impeachment inquiry in an entirely appropriate way. Proper for a high-stakes investigation, initial witnesses testified privately. When Republicans insisted on public hearings, the hearings went public. And the thoughtful questioning, especially in the House Intelligence Committee, did much to lay a fact-based foundation for the abuse-of-power charge. That article states that President Donald Trump “ignored and injured the interests of the nation” by using the power of his office to attempt to pressure Ukraine into a politically beneficial investigation of his political rival.
Americans heard powerful and troubling testimony from witnesses who largely corroborated one another. They saw for themselves the readout of the now-infamous “Do us a favor, though” phone call from Trump to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy. On Monday came the release of the Republican-ordered inspector general’s report into the FBI investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 election.
That report found the investigation to be legitimate and free from political motivation, bias or spying on the Trump campaign. Republicans have been trying mightily to discredit the probe and, as Trump would prefer, shift the focus to Ukraine, though the entire U.S. intelligence community has said that Russia was the primary actor. The report also noted some performance failures in the FBI’s procedures. That is appropriate for separate examination, but has little bearing on the impeachment process.
The second article is one, frankly, that Trump has brought upon himself, through his intractable rejection of Congress’ watchdog role. His refusal to allow key figures to testify, from Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney down to former employees and campaign workers, is anathema to a political system built on checks and balances. House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff rightly noted that should Trump’s ban be allowed to stand with no consequence, it “would decimate Congress’ ability to conduct oversight of this president or any other in the future.” Republicans should think twice before surrendering an accountability role that may be needed in the future, just as it was when they investigated President Bill Clinton’s transgressions.
Bringing articles of impeachment is a significant step, but not the last one. This now moves to committee votes, then the full House and, if passed, on to the Senate for a trial to determine whether Trump should become the first president removed from office by Congress. These are serious times for the country, and the Star Tribune Editorial Board is reserving judgment for now on whether impeachment or conviction are justified.
In the meantime, it was heartening to see Tuesday that the House and White House have made a deal on the USMCA trade agreement negotiated by Trump. The nation’s work must go on, even in times such as these. The agreement will bring a measure of badly needed stability amid a trade war that has hurt many, including in Minnesota, where exports have been falling.
___
The Free Press of Mankato, Dec. 12
SCSU football: Killing program matters for MSU
Why it matters: St. Cloud State’s decision to drop football is a high-profile illustration of the diverging futures of the two largest institutions in the Minnesota State system.
St. Cloud State’s announcement Tuesday that it is dropping its football program was no surprise to those who understand its financial straits and its inability (or unwillingness) to comply with Title IX’s gender-equity requirements.
But considering SCSU’s decades-long status as the chief rival to what is now named Minnesota State Mankato, Tuesday’s move poses some questions, and challenges, for MSU. If SCSU can’t support a football program, what does that imply for the local counterpart? Will other schools in the Northern Sun Intercollegiate Conference join St. Cloud State - and Minnesota Crookston - in dropping football? If so, what does that mean for MSU?
It wasn’t that long ago that St. Cloud State was the larger institution. The Mankato school has shot past it in enrollment (mainly because SCSU has shrunk) and MSU President Richard Davenport said in a recent meeting with this editorial board that MSU, unlike many of its sisters in the Minnesota State system, is poised for growth. MSU faces neither the budget woes that have prompted SCSU to give layoff notices to eight faculty, nor St. Cloud State’s adverse court ruling in a Title IX case.
Standing by itself, MSU’s football program - currently making yet another run through the NCAA’s Division II playoffs - would seem secure. But it doesn’t stand alone. The Northern Sun conference, which MSU (and St. Cloud State) joined upon the demise of the old North Central Conference, is a large and awkward collection of Division II schools, many of them chronically noncompetitive. Crookston leaves football having compiled a 2-64 record since 2015; MSU thumped them 81-0 this season. That’s not healthy.
The NSIC recently changed its bylaws to allow member schools to drop football and remain in the conference. It had resisted that change in the past, and reversing its position suggests that other members in the only DII conference in the Upper Midwest at least want that option open to them. Meanwhile, Augustana - another NCC refugee - has announced plans to move up to Division I.
The Mankato and St. Cloud schools have been football rivals since 1923; they won’t make it to 100 years. Nothing is guaranteed, including the future of the NSIC. St. Cloud State’s decision has ramifications, mysterious as they may be for the moment, for MSU.
___
St. Cloud Times, Dec. 13
While painful, SCSU sports cuts reflect fiscal, legal, educational realities
There is no doubt the 115 student-athletes, along with nine coaches and assistant coaches, are hurt the most by St. Cloud State’s decision this week to end its football and men’s and women’s golf teams.
Most importantly, the university certainly must meet its obligations to help the student-athletes who continue their educations here.
That said, given the three-pronged challenge the university faces involving operating shortfalls campus-wide, Title IX compliance and the undeniable costs of athletics, especially the football program, this decision, while painful, makes legal, fiscal and educational sense.
For many reasons, including athletics, St. Cloud State is facing substantial (and likely ongoing) budget challenges. Changes are needed at many levels. Witness program and staff cuts to its library, theater and philosophy departments.
Athletics, while important, are not the core mission of St. Cloud State. Educating students in efficient and affordable ways must always be the top priority - even if that means cutting sports programs.
Re-examine athletics
The bottom-line truth about St. Cloud State athletics as a whole is, like most public colleges nationwide, they cost more to operate than the revenues they generate. And again, like most of their peers, those deficits are covered through student fees, donations and corporate sponsorships.
At the least, it’s time St. Cloud State take student fees out of that equation.
It also should be time the university take a hard look at all remaining 17 NCAA Division I and II sports and consider keeping only those that:
- Maintain compliance with Title IX requirements in the most cost-effective manner;
- Benefit or appeal to a large number of students;
- And cover their own costs without tapping the pockets of rank-and-file students.
Yes, that might seem like a high bar to clear. However, with the university struggling financially, rank-and-file students should not be expected to pay even one penny so that comparatively small numbers of their peers can participate in sports that don’t draw big crowds nor cover their own costs.
University leaders announced these cuts Tuesday to counter “persistent shortfalls totaling $1.6 million the athletics department has been navigating over the past five years.” They expect them to save $1.25 million annually.
That’s a good start. Again, though, knowing St. Cloud State’s overall budget problems, is running 17 athletic programs really the best use of resources for an institution where the top priority is education?
That’s a hard question, but it must be asked amid the university’s declining enrollment and rising costs, not to mention student debt levels and how state assistance to higher education has fallen the past few decades.
Football: Perception vs reality
Again, the cuts are incredibly painful to the student-athletes, their families and the coaching staffs. Dedicated fans also have reason to be upset as do fans of college football and especially the 98 football players left without a program.
Unfortunately, though, numbers show there simply is not a huge football fan base at St. Cloud State.
The football program had only 58 season ticket-holders this year. And in the past three years, actual attendance at home games has average between 1,000 and 1,500 people, Athletic Director Heather Weems said in advance of Tuesday’s announcement.
To that end, this season the official box scores of home games show the average number of tickets sold per game was 2,766. Yet the actual attendance estimates indicate 1,000 or more no-shows each game.
Remember, too, SCSU students get in free, and three of the five home games offered buy-one-get-one-free deals or free admission to youth, first responders and military members and veterans.
The message from attendance is clear - and it has little to do with the quality of play: There simply is not a big fan base for a program that costs in excess of $1 million annually to run.
Title IX - it’s the law
Finally, the university fully acknowledged the cuts are its way to comply with a recent court ruling stemming from a Title IX lawsuit filed after St. Cloud State cut six athletic programs in 2016.
Title IX, a 1972 U.S. law that prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex in educational programs funded with federal dollars, requires the university to balance the opportunities and benefits it offers for female students in athletic programs.
The judge found St. Cloud State didn’t comply with Title IX from at least 2014 and ordered the university to fix the imbalance. Eliminating football and golf was the only way St. Cloud State found to address its financial challenges while complying with the court’s order, President Robbyn Wacker said.
Men’s soccer will be added to the school’s athletic program to keep the program in compliance with National Collegiate Athletic Association rules.
Men’s and women’s ice hockey are the school’s only Division I sports. And while the women’s program struggles on the fiscal and fan fronts, it must be maintained as Division I per Title IX requirements.
That’s the reality of abiding by the law.
To be clear, yes, the student-athletes and coaches who saw their programs scrapped Tuesday have a right to be upset - as do their families and friends.
For the rest of the community, an open-minded look at how to simultaneously become legally compliant and fiscally sound while keeping the focus on the core mission - educating students - reveals St. Cloud State’s decision to be reasonable.
Just hope that it’s the last such painful choice made for a while.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.