A PASCU Chapter at Each PASSHE University - Part 18

Lessons Learned and the Path to Victory

 
The blog post of June 29, 2015 ended with the words found in the above heading.
 
In this blog post we will review the lessons learned from various media accounts of the West Chester Proposal, and use insights obtained from those accounts to suggest the shape of a proposal that might have a much higher probability of success while delivering many, but not all, of the benefits that State-related status would have provided to West Chester University—had that proposal been successful.

Lessons Learned

To begin, it is important to realize that, had West Chester University succeeded in gaining State-related status, its future prospects as a State-supported—but largely independent—university would have been very promising.  The prospect of such independence had to have been a key factor in the decision by West Chester supporters to launch a bold and ambitious plan to gain independence and realize its aspirations.

 
It was a truly worthy goal, but the political odds stacked against it were simply too great to overcome.
 
As we saw in previous blog posts, the large number of would-be “losers” under the West Chester Proposal, together with their correspondingly large legislative delegations in the State Senate and State House of Representatives, basically determined that the Proposal could not gain the votes needed for victory.
 
To have a chance of success, any proposal to change the legal status of individual PASSHE universities will require an affirmative act of the legislature.  That, in turn, will require a proposal yielding the largest possible number of winners and the smallest possible number of losers, so that the combination of their respective legislative delegations can carry the day by producing a win when the votes are counted.

Recall that major sources of legislative opposition to the West Chester Proposal arose on behalf of those stakeholder groups who saw themselves as significant losers under the West Chester Proposal, including:

 
1.       The “other” thirteen PASSHE universities that would be “left behind;"
2.       The four existing State-related universities; and
3.       The eight unions representing approximately 90% of PASSHE’s 12,500 employees.
 

The Path to Victory

 
The path to victory must be paved with a proposal that changes many of the would-be losers under the West Chester Proposal, into would-be winners, or at least neutral parties, under the new proposal.
 
One way to turn the other thirteen PASSHE universities from losers into winners would be to craft a proposal under which all fourteen PASSHE universities would greatly benefit.  At that point, opposition from the “Majority Stakeholders,” i.e., the students, parents and alumni from the other thirteen PASSHE universities would be eliminated or at least significantly reduced.
 
Keeping the fourteen PASSHE universities together under this new and potentially successful proposal would also reduce or eliminate the opposition from the stakeholders identified in items 2 and 3 above.

“Politics is the art of the possible, the attainable — the art of the next best”

                                                                                            Otto von Bismarck (1815-1898)

The above quote is quite relevant at this point in the discussion because the West Chester Proposal—had it succeeded—would clearly have produced the best possible outcome for West Chester University itself. 

 
Recall, however, that the West Chester Proposal came fifty years after the IUP Proposal which would have produced a very similar outcome: A “State-owned” university morphing into a “State-related” university.
 
But the IUP Proposal also failed for the same reasons that the West Chester Proposal failed:  Despite being a best outcome for the individual universities involved, neither proposal was possible, politically speaking.
 
Since the best  outcome for individual PASSHE universities was foreclosed twice in fifty years due to the politics of the situation, it may be time to take von Bismarck’s advice and consider the “next best” option. 

Keeping the Fourteen PASSHE Universities Together

 
Recall that a major obstacle to the West Chester Plan was the notion of breaking up the State-wide collective bargaining units which tightly bind the fourteen PASSHE universities together.  Those labor contracts are negotiated in Harrisburg on behalf of all fourteen universities, and the eight unions that represent 90% of PASSHE’s employees are understandably opposed to breaking up bargaining units.   
 
The next best option then, politically speaking, would be one in which all fourteen PASSHE universities would remain together in a system that would preserve the bargaining units, but while simultaneously providing many, if not all, of the benefits available to individual State-related universities.

The Next Best Option: “A State-Related System of Fourteen Universities”

 
Although the idea of PASSHE as a “State-related system of fourteen universities” sounds interesting, there are many reasons why such a State-related system of universities would also never be politically possible.
 
In view of the fierce opposition by the four State-related universities to just a single PASSHE university becoming State-related, imagine their opposition to a State-related system of fourteen universities!  
 
So the new entity will never be permitted to become, strictly speaking, a “State-related system of fourteen universities.”  But it can and must become a system of fourteen universities that continues to provide the services that true “public” universities must provide, while at the same time receiving many, if not all, of the benefits that State-related universities currently receive.
 
A new name will be needed to describe this proposed new kind of university system, but its statutory purpose would be clear: “To provide high quality education at the lowest possible cost to the students.” 
 
To be continued.