H -°, L 22° | Tomorrow: 
H 23°, L 4°In the American political experience, debates often bring out the laughable, the tragic and — more commonly — the ridiculous. Whether it was Bush’s blank and horrifyingly protracted stares into the camera or Dan Quayle’s disastrous effort to embody the spirit of Jack Kennedy, our would-be leaders have always managed to help us appreciate the sillier aspects of public performance.
But if there’s anything that conjures up nostalgia for the past, it’s the sensation that it’s being repeated by even less palatable people. Which is why it was so frustrating to watch the junior party boys on the NatUP campaign, who debated the merits of a Natatorium renovation this past Thursday against a collection of opposed students who call themselves No New Seg Fees.
Convinced of its cause, NatUP and its membership of messianic protomales have taken it upon themselves to lead the crusade for a new facility whose final cost will entail a rise in segregated fees of $54.19 per semester. For 30 years. And while the group measured up well against the hastily mounted response of No New Seg Fees, they still managed to manifest all the verbal grease and dubious integrity of used-car salesmen.
At the debate, NatUP was so eager to give an impression of support that it packed the debate room with around 20 supporters, all wearing the same red NatUp shirts. But intimidation-by-apparel or not, somebody’s been digging into the Natty a little early, because the arguments put forth by the group’s master debaters were wobbly at best.
First, the NatUP folks made the outlandish claim that the greatest recession in our lifetimes is an ideal moment to finance the construction, because recessions lower costs. One member even seemed to revel in the group’s peculiar lexicon of sleaze, claiming repeatedly that, given the recession, the “time for great value is now.” There’s a reason costs decline in recessions, however. It’s because no one spends money in them — and they don’t spend money because they don’t have it.
To argue that dumb behavior somehow magically exempts oneself from every law of economic reality is not only arrogant, it’s the founding premise of reality TV. Students are already struggling to pay for college as it is, and one would be hard-pressed to tell them that professors’ salaries — or their groceries — are less valid concerns than personal fitness training studios.
Additionally, the opposing side was not hesitant to point out that NatUP has made an abysmally limited effort to solicit contributions from donors. The response was characteristically silly — no one wanted to contribute. But no one from the campaign ever specified how hard they looked, and it didn’t seem as though NatUP was that bothered by the burden that would be assumed by students in the complete absence of private aid. Then again, it is much easier to tell oneself consequences don’t exist when someone else winds up on the wrong side of the median.
One of the NatUP representatives also made the grievously dumb statement that concerns about rising tuition were better acted on by voting in the race for governor, because he appoints the Regents who set tuition. Segregated fees, the aspiring politica continued, are not tuition. But sometimes all rectangles really are squares, and gloss is just plain bullshit. Every student pays segregated fees, and those fees have doubled in five years. It is a straightforward lie to parry serious concerns by differentiating between two sums of money, both of which you pay to attend college.
And in that vein, it was really NatUP’s style that left a bad taste. Some arguments were bad, but almost all were obfuscations of the truth. This propensity to distort culminated in the statement that their campaign material weren’t actually telling you how to vote — they were just “giving you the facts.” That’s not debating. That’s assuming every member of your audience ate paint chips as children.
So how did NatUP measure up against the people they intend to rob?
Their preparation was impressive. They spent years gathering information. Their statistics, while not persuasive, were the results of years of research and tens of thousands spent. Even when they misinformed, they did so like the pros. NatUP had even calculated the exact percentage of tuition that their fee increase would represent. And yet for some odd reason, they still needed to pack a room with a gang of pectorially enhanced bros in order to score the point.
Sam Clegg ([email protected]) is a junior majoring in economics.
IP hash: 3d01b716
Hell yes, Sam Clegg. Thanks for pointing out just how ridiculous and arrogant the NatUp people are. Their claims that an extra $54 per semester is a negligible fee show just how privileged and out of touch they are. To students who are already scrounging to pay existing tuition and seg fees, that’s more money than they can afford!
IP hash: 8abe7e44
I like this.
IP hash: a5f8ec00
Wow no one has put up any cult propaganda on this article yet. So unlike “the cult”.
IP hash: 81a99026
yes, cult indeed. i spoke to 7 natty uppers and they had little to say about the merits of the project in the broader context of campus priorities. when i asked if our children should have to pay $450 extra over their college career, i got shrugs. when i asked about education and classes and teachers, i got dismissed (no pun!!!)
a cult believes in ideas that are considered strange or unreasonable by the majority. but if NatUp folks can’t even assess what it is they believe in, well, we’ve got something worse.
the NatUp campaign reeks of narrow-minded privilege, and is abusing an student body with a short-term memory.
IP hash: ae2634d1
Great article Sam! I am glad that you see the need to stand up against the new Nat! We need to find new ways of funding this project before making students foot the bill.
If you are looking for someone who will keep your costs low, Vote Nick Novak for SSFC. I will make sure to oppose any increase on costs for students, like the new Nat. For more info on my campaign, please visit electnick.com and vote at asm.wisc.edu/elections.html.
IP hash: 615a439a
How many kids on this campus are struggling to pay for tuition? I’m sick of this starving college kid bullshit. Can the BH opinion writers craft an argument without an ad hominem attack?
IP hash: 74d6ed0b
Ha ha ha ha!
This is probably the worst piece of journalism I have seen from the Herald in my 4 years here.
If you were actually at the debate, you would know that there really was no comparing the two sides. NatUP showed up prepared, actually ANSWERED the questions (as opposed to ranting about small class sizes and furloughs, which had nothing to do with the referendum that is taking place, and which students have no control over), and used professional studies to back up their claims.
NoNewSegFees quoted Vladimir Lenin and the Big Labowski to back up their wild claims and comparisons, which included comparing the NatUP referendum to “a wallet full of cash, and then taking the money out of the wallet and spending it on a burrito or a ring” (that’s a direct quote).
More insulting, however, is your characterization of NatUP members as a cult. I think I get it though, Sam. If a group of people organize themselves, and come out to support a cause they believe in, but that cause is different than your’s, then they are clearly a cult. Which explains why you didn’t refer to the NoNewSegFees (NNSF) supporters as a cult, despite the fact that they too showed up in NNSF t-shirts equipped with NNSF fliers. It’s because you agree with them.
You are a poor excuse for a journalist. You think being witty and accusing that people who think differently than you “ate paint chips as children,” is what people want to read. But really Sam, you just come off as an arrogant windbag who doesn’t really know what he’s talking about.
IP hash: 329d81a0
NatUp is a marketing gig to put on the resume. you might convince yourself we need this nat while you are digging up facts. but you have no arguments for students who do not want tuition raised. there’s a reason our normal tuition does not pay for a new Nat, it’s because its not necessary. we should be glad we already have 3 functional buildings for working out.
IP hash: bfba0b4f
This pretty much sums up my views on this shit. From the privileged point of view $54 is chump change. These guys are glazing over the fact that a lot of students, including me, are struggling just to stay in this school and pay for rent and food. They may just say “oh it’s only $54 bucks” but for me that’s half a damn paycheck.
-stoven
IP hash: 950f630a
“Accept certain inalienable truths. Prices will rise [and] politicians will philander.”
No matter what the NatUp or NoNewSegFees groups say, prices are going to rise. Students may as well get something out of it.
I voted “Yes.”
IP hash: 2e55c11a
Let me preface my comment with a few facts about myself: 1. I am completely independent. I am financially responsible for everything from tuition (including seg fees) to health and dental insurance. I work 30 hours a week, and take a full course load. 2. I do not enjoy or appreciate tuition/seg fee increases.
However, despite these things, I thoroughly enjoy college. Part of my experience is indeed the use of recreational facilities on campus. I run three miles 4-5 times a week at the SERF. I cannot express the amount of enjoyment and stress relief this half hour gives me. I find it incredibly laughable that people are in such strong opposition to the improvement of our dungeon-like, extremely inadequate and outdated facilities. This is not something that is unnecessary. There are only 6 treadmills at the Nat. Explain to me how 6 treadmills serve the needs of thousands of students and faculty members.
Further, as far as private donations, does anyone understand funding, bureaucracy, and politics associated with projects like this? The $54.19 is a MAXIMUM. Once approved, funding will be sought in other ways. A concrete plan and the actuality of the project is needed before most donors are willing to commit funds.
In Addition, most students who are truly unable to afford higher education do in fact receive great amounts of help. I would know. I receive these types of grants and aid.
Please, do not call people who enjoy working out and support this project “a gang of pectorially enhanced bros”. I am a girl, and I am certainly not pectorially enhanced.
IP hash: 2e55c11a
Although this is an opinion column and I respect the right to publish a view such as this, I find it reprehensible to call those in support of the project “pectorially enhanced bros”. Present your opinion in a way consistent with an educated college student not that of an angry five year old with an advanced vocabulary. Name calling will always be immature.
IP hash: accf4125
Wow, this just goes to show how one-sided and ignorant the media in Madison is. We’re a college campus that should be intent on writing constructive articles invoking constructive criticism, not outright namecalling and slander. Whether you are for or against the NatUp project, this should be an embarassment to the Badger Herald and those of you that put stock in what is written here.
IP hash: 95094c89
That “free” bus pass that all students get actually costs $53.76 in segregated fees each semester whether you use the pass or not. Maybe you and the rest of the Badger Herald cult should write a douche bag article about that instead?
IP hash: fbb635e7
i happen to love my bus pass. i agree with you though that not everyone uses them.
IP hash: 7d874fe3
Sam, you calling a group of people who show up to support a cause and are wearing the same colored shirt a cult is just ignorant. I suppose the UW marching band and all the badger football, basketball, and hockey fans are also a part of a cult. Also, if you knew anything about economics you would realize that to get out of a recession you need to spend money and support the economy, but I guess you were too busy “eating paint chips” to take an econ class.
IP hash: 6f6acbae
I’m a former econ TA here and have to laugh at your economic stimulus argument. It makes two assumptions, both of which are or will be false:
1) That students wouldn’t spend the additional $54 per semester on something else if the Nat plan fails. 2) Obama gets re-elected in 2012, so we stay in a recession.
However, the “cult” business is ridiculous. You’ve definitely got a point there.
IP hash: 97c6bf24
Instead of going out and drinking at the bars, why not buy your own beer twice a semester and save yourself the $50 that it would cost you to be healthy at this campus?
Seems like starving isn’t the only option after all…
IP hash: 83b5e490
Sam… Did you even go to the debate?
First, I think this is total bullshit the way you guys twist and turn all the facts. It all boils down to one thing…
Do students want to pay $54.19 a semester to build a new facility. That is it. LET US VOTE ON IT!!!
If you want to get personal and call NatUp “pectorially enhanced bros”. Well go smoke some more dope… It was pretty obvious from the debate the leader of the TAA has spent more than $54.19 a semester on weed. How much dope causes you to say that you can buy a burrito or a ring? To think that I am paying for these TA’s tuition makes me sick. You get free tuition but are crying about $54.
As for the car salesman comment, I don’t think the NatUp could have been more straight forwarded. This is a vote… you vote for the new building or you vote against it. It is simple.
I agree… Tuition and Segregated Fees are only going to rise. It is about time we spend some money on something that directly benefits the students.
IP hash: 81a99026
Yes, and let’s have Rec Sports split the NatUp war chest of $30,00 evenly among BOTH SIDES!!
IP hash: 3cdc2217
Hey, I agree with you that the No New Seg Fees side didn’t always put forth as solid an argument as they should have in the debate. However, they also had only about a week to prepare, and were kept completely in the dark about the debate content, because NatUP insisted that the only way they would debate was if they could set all of the terms. Also, I’ll take the funny, off-the-cuff, and dead-on serious and earnest answers No New Seg Fees offered over the canned, scripted answers of the NatUP side any day.
And as for your comment that TAs get “free tuition”: it’s not free. TAs work anywhere from 14 to 20+ hours a week teaching your labs and discussion sections, grading your poorly-written papers and exams, and answering your ignorant, whiny emails. (And I do say “you,” because most TAs like most of their students, and want them to succeed—but we all know at least a few like you, who think that we don’t do anything.) Most of the classes on this campus would not be able to happen without TAs. We save the UW money every year by doing what we do for such low wages, and it leaves us very little to, you know, pay rent and eat and whatnot. Most TAs I know work multiple part-time jobs just to get by, and they do it because they love the subject they study and they love teaching.
It is true that the cost of education is rising, but I sure as hell am going to do my part to keep it down (and keep food and rent money in my wallet) by voting “no”.
IP hash: 1bf257a4
As a neutral person, this whole issue is plain stupid. Whether we like it or not, tuition prices are going to go up one way or another. quit bickering like a bunch of babies and just let the student body vote. At this point in time, seeing how immature the Nosegfees group is acting by seeing how they treat the promotional Natup things around campus, and how the Natup group is obviously not doing anything about it, as of yet, i wish people would just shut up, vote, and see how the outcome is.
yea, i hate paying for more tuition and wouldnt want others who are also struggling to pay for tuition have to work harder to find money to pay for this. but i also hate having no space at the nat to play ball, run, whatever.. and hearing people bitch about how there’s no space and how crappy the nat is. suck it up then if you don’t want to fund it or join the natup group and come up with an alternate way of funding.
this article is also bullshit.
IP hash: 394b4041
Sam,
I, myself, am a big supporter of the NatUp campaign, and have more than a few concerns about the completely immature statements you have put into this article.
First of all, there are ALWAYS going to be different groups of people with different beliefs; these do NOT in any way count as a cult. You are completely mistaken if you think the group of NatUp supporters is a cult. If you do want to consider this a cult, why then is the NNSF group not considered a cult? You are trying to make innocent people who know the condition the Natatorium is in look as if we were “the bad guys”.
I totally understand that people who may not use the Nat very much don’t want tuition to go towards the renovation of a gym; however there is a HUGE number of people that do, in fact, use the Nat, and there is simply not enough room for them. As a student employee of RecSports, I know there are numerous complaints about the lack of gym space, the SMALL amount of cardio machines, and so much more. Although you may not be a huge user of this facility, there are plenty of people who would largely benefit from a new Nat, and why should we have to deal with a Nat that doesn’t suffice? As I’m sure you are aware, because you seem to know everything, there is also a new dorm being built on lakeshore that is going to house 600 students. When this dorm comes, the Nat is going to have an even larger need for renovation.
I really don’t appreciate that in this article you numerously call our arguments “dumb” or “arrogant”. To you, these TRUE and REASONABLE claims may be “dumb”, but to us they mean a lot. It is so completely immature for you to try and break us down like this, and frankly it is NOT going to work. I actually think being so rude in this article you probably scored NatUp a few more followers, because who would want to be on the side of someone so inconsiderate of a variety of opinions.
I would also like to point out the number of posters that have been torn down by the NNSF group members, not to mention in our OWN FACILITIES. There was also an attempt to cut down our banner hanging outside the SERF last night, which disgusts me. Go ahead and promote your ideas and opinions, thats great. But do NOT ruin our advertisements that we put effort into, and even more don’t try to make us sound “dumb” with your false statements.
IP hash: 6d795419
Great OPINION piece. Ranting privileged junior republicans aside, this article does a great job of pointing out how flimsy the rational is for charging 30 years of students, the vast majority of which will not get to vote on this proposal, 50 dollars extra a SEMESTER.
This project is a bad idea: the Nat is a horrible location, the expansion should not be paid for as a fee when it is a long term infrastructure investment, this abuse of segregated fees is a horrible precedent that will end up impoverishing students, and college is expensive enough as it is! If NatUp runs a bake sale for the next 30 years to fund their glorious gym then I’ll buy a cookie now and then, but that is all of the support that they will be getting from me.
Also, if UW wants to be competitive with other top tier schools it is the administrations duty to build athletic facilities that are affordable and will attract students. Right now it seems that they are content to advocate a system of fees that make an airline look charitable.
IP hash: 4e8da093
Sam. You must be the dumbest econ major on earth if you don’t realize why even in a recession this building makes sense. It’s econ 101. Your article is also so blatantly biased it’s unbelievable. Everything written is complete heresay. What happened to investigative journalism? I am not even fully in favor of the project but this article is so skewed it did nothing but push me against your cause. The no set fees group has acted like immature high schoolers with name calling and ripping down signs instead of constructing an actual argument. You are no better than any of them and I hope you get kicked off your “high horse” and come back down to reality. Ps if you want to be taken seriously don’t write a crap article showing your immature freshman like attitude.
IP hash: 19ba285f
I agree with the bus pass person. How come no one ever bitches about that. At least people use the SERF and Nat, I don’t know anyone that uses that stupid bus pass enough to milk $55 bucks out of it.
IP hash: fbb635e7
anyone who saves money by not paying $600 in rent to share a tiny no window apartment but instead lives a little further away. during the winter months (november-april) i ride the bus AT LEAST twice a day. thats $3 a day. thats what…$450 im saving by not paying for that each time? and i don’t even live that far away from campus.
IP hash: 745c9d2b
thats exactly it. you do not know those people. there are 50,000 kids on this campus. how many kids do you know that use the nat? because i do not know one. i’m not saying no one uses the nat, i’m saying just because YOU do not know someone personally does NOT mean it is not used.
IP hash: 4006d545
I believe this is what they call the “free-ride effect,” or something like that. People who use the facility will be happy paying to renovate it, and people who don’t use the Nat don’t want to pay. If it were easy or there was a way to make people who used the Nat could contribute and those who don’t use it don’t have to pay, I’m sure it would be implemented, but that’s not practical. It’s easier to share the load, and anyone who chooses to use the Nat or take one of the Physical Activity courses will use it. It just all around improves the school.
The one part I don’t particularly like about the plan is the lack of contributions from outside sources, or from faculty and staff who use the facilities as well. If this could be addressed, I’m sure the referendum would pass without causing quite so much friction.
Regardless, as was previously stated, prices will rise no matter what. Whether the referendum passes or not, prices will rise. In the grand scheme of things, perhaps this isn’t that much, but to someone who doesn’t use the Nat or IS struggling to pay for college already, it may be unneccesary. At least this way it is benefiting the university as a whole. Whether or not someone chooses to use these benefits, however, is a whole different issue.
IP hash: da18ce92
Lets pay $54 for a facility that everyone will flock to once, go “OHHH WOW” then fucking leave and be too lazy to go again. Lets pay for Nat up cause we’re too fucking lazy to go to the serf or too impatient to wait for a machine when it’s crowded YEAH VOTE YES.
IP hash: 950f630a
Econ majors are for the kids not smart enough to get into the School of Business… but it doesn’t take a business student (or an econ major, for that matter) to know that the economy moves in cycles, that recessions end and that every recession turns into an expansion.
Now IS the time to put this plan in motion. If you don’t think it should come from segregated fees or couldn’t care less about recreational facilities, that’s what the vote is for.
I sat and talked with a woman today who was wearing a NNSF shirt. She said “Take my situation for example. I’m working three part time jobs at minimum wage. That’s eight hours a semester of work to pay for that new facility. My debt grows every semester I’m here!”
Well honey, here is something to think about. YOU’RE GOING TO GRADUATE FROM THE UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN. You won’t be working minimum wage when you’re done here.
What is a $55 per semester difference going to make in your lifetime when you compare it to the $40,000+ education you’re receiving?
IP hash: fbb635e7
good news. your degree doesn’t mean as much as it used to. you’re still going to have a hard time finding a job. yes, even you “im so smart i got into the school of business”.
IP hash: 745c9d2b
what is $55 dollars going to do for her? better question, what is a new gym going to do for her when she leaves this school? And one might argue that the point isnt that “its just $55,” the point is, where does it end? we are already paying segregated fees for the new union south that no one wanted in the first place. secondly, people like you are the reason our country is trillions of dollars in debt.. do you often find yourself saying.. “sure i’ll buy it. who cares?.. i won’t have to pay for this for years, or better yet i’ll die and my family will have to pay it off.”
IP hash: da18ce92
Yeah 5:51 PM, cause it’ll be THAT EASY to find a job once we get the hell outta here with this economy.
IP hash: 88e7af91
Really, the $54 increase starts in Fall of 2013. Even assuming one is on a “five year plan” this increase would affect only current freshmen and sophomores. And when you find a decent gym that only charges 54 dollars for an entire semester of membership, please let me know; maybe that would dissuade me from supporting the NatUP campaign.
IP hash: e0f1e619
Um, you’re forgetting about GRAD STUDENTS, dumbass.
IP hash: f9358649
Ever heard of GRAD Students? Not everyone leaves in 4-5 years, buddy.
IP hash: ad9afe46
What a poorly written article. This isn’t an educated opinion piece, it’s an angsty blog entry. Anyone who looks at this and decides to include it in their decision making is ignorant and easily swayed by some cute words and ad hominem. If you can’t write an article without making an ass of yourself and everyone who voted no, including myself, maybe you should rethink your education route and try talk radio with Rush Limbaugh.
IP hash: 55f9d228
A cult? NatUp? Laughable. If there is any cult on this campus, it is definitely he self proclaimed “Activists” on this campus that call themselves No New Seg Fees and Mpower.
I don’t have a horse in this race, as I can’t go against my collective working unit, but I am aware of some of my colleagues tactics and I think it is a bit ridiculous. When it comes to defacing other campaign’s materials and telling every half truth and lie you can to push your own agenda, it gets a little nauseating.
To call NatUp a “cult” is a low blow considering it looks to be a very energetic and organized group of young students, considering the other “true” cults we have on this campus…
IP hash: 0e90c3b2
You are so F dumb! cult like? that qualifies EVERY group on campus as a cult! You just changed my vote to NATUP!!!! people like you should not be a journalist. Make sure to take this one to your first interview you F**.
IP hash: 0eee10d0
Dood! It’s a CULT! Face it!
IP hash: 0e90c3b2
This just qualifies every group on campus as a cult.. are you dumb???? make sure to take this article to your first interview, EVERY journalist knows this is pure ignorance. NatUP has my vote, just because of this article!
IP hash: 0e90c3b2
aren’t the members of No new seg fees wearing the same color t-shirts? does this make them a cult as well? lets get this done NatUP!
IP hash: c6eec3ce
Thankfully NatUp has already spent >$4000 of our SegFees (actually, could one of you admirable supporters please tell us the actual amount of money that you spent?) on promotional items for their campaign including those lovely red t-shirts and the banner in front of the SERF.
Spendin’ fees to get your fees, awesome.
To all those disbelievers, yeah, there are kids on this campus who can’t afford $54 a semester. And lets not forget, the cost to NatUP is just an additional segfee on a portion of our tuition fees that is already slated to rise - not only that but tuition as a whole is already bound to increase as the state has lowered their level of funding for the university. As a student who face’s financial difficulty and has trouble scraping together each month’s rent this referendum is frivolous and poorly timed.
Also, to whoever is hating on Peter from the TAA. Our seg fees pay for his tuition right? And his tuition includes seg fees. So by opposing the NatUp, Peter was actually looking out for the cost imposed on the rest of the students as we’re not only paying 54 for ourselves but also footing the combined seg fees for all TA’s and other individuals on campus who don’t have to pay tuition.
Lastly, are there any stats on use of the Shell? I’m pretty sure the Shell is already home to some of the features NatUp supporters would like to see installed in the revamped gym.
IP hash: f9dae42e
What are you talking about? TA’s have to pay their own seg fees…they only get tuition remission. That’s the whole premise of their opposition.
Also- what features does the Shell have that the NatUp proposal has, some fitness equipment and an indoor track that is closed during the afternoon hours for athletics to use? Or do you assume that because it is connected to McClain that the indoor turf is open for anyone to use…use the fine education you are getting at UW to actually learn something before you comment on a subject you clearly know nothing about.
IP hash: eed7dfff
Sam, you should be ashamed of yourself.
IP hash: 912ee649
Hey Sam, First, I’m a girl. Not a “pectorally enhanced bro”. I support NatUp because fitness is what I love…much like you probably love the Badger Herald, politics, econ? Yet you will not see me derogating NNSF members because I feel like students should be able to form their own opinion on the matter. It is pretty “ridiculous” that the NNSF group and its supporters have to go to these lengths to swing votes in their favor.
IP hash: 0eee10d0
I also love sports. I was a varsity athlete.
But I happen to LOOOVE democracy.
So let’s have campus and rec sports pay for campus building and rec sports.
And let’s keep students paying for essentials like classrooms (crumbing) and instructors (professors not TAs) and courses (so we can graduate).
IP hash: b8c85f20
I’m pretty neutral on the subject. I understand both sides, however having read this article, I’m going to vote “Yes” to the Nat Up program. Just to spite you in spirit. Way to go, buddy.