And in the meantime, since 1930, the IHL has evolved into a board that is highly politicized--one that protects inept presidents like Thames at any cost--even as the university falters.

If this current crisis is not enough to make people wake up, what will?

I'd LOVE to hear what Thames' supporters have to say about this.  In the words of GW Bush, "Bring it on."

quote:

---

Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
"it will take a constitutional amendment. how long you have to wait?"

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
"but we ain't Ole Miss. not by a long shot."

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by: Think Tank on Hardy Street
"It was done in the Bilbo era and it can be done in the Barbour era. The history of Mississippi higher education during the Bilbo era is fascinating - and scary. Much like today. The accreditation body played no small role in providing the impetus for change. Much like today."

---

I'm sympathetic with change but be careful what you ask for -- the current legislature isn't exactly a group of folks I'd want to rely on for a good change . . . with the governor and the legislature at odds it is one more political battlefield each will try to control.

The last change to the Board (shortening the terms and getting rid of the old system based on an outdated number of congressional districts)  is an improvement. But the Board is a bit like the Supreme Court -- once they get appointed they pass beyond the control of either legislature or governor. The problem of course, is the intial appointment -- if a governer appoints an idiot; an ideologue; a university loyalist, or someone who simply neither knows nor care to learn about higher education, then woe be the Board.

The reason behind the change in the Bilbo era had to do with wanting to create an independent counterbalance that could resist either legislature or governor from tinkering directly with the universities. In this sense, the longer the term, the more indendent the board becomes. 

The Board is still incredibly political -- we all know that. So the issue here is how to arrive at a more balanced board that is less influenced by old school loyalties in favor of working for the bigger picture (a value the Board claims to achieve but clearly does not consistently practice) while at the same time keeping it the independent agency it needs to be to protect the universities from direct interference by government.

quote:

---

Originally posted by: First Ant at the Picnic
"Stephen - Why do you think the IHL board is so political? I know for a fact that all boards appointed by the governor are not political in that manner. Several USM faculty members will attest to that. I don't understand why the IHL is so different. Any thoughts on this?"

---

I'm guessing -- this state has some pretty entrenched and almost Byzantine centers of power that are a fairly stratified and resistent to change. I don't know how else to explain how we could live for almost thirty years with a Board that was based on a thoroughly out of date and unrepresentative basis for allotting appointments. That a system was clearly so manifestly unjust and yet not get chnaged until recently only shows how powerful those powers have been. Clearly there are entrenched interests in the northern part of the state and (no secret here) associated with the two largest schools with the most tradition who have a great deal to lose if political and economic power slips to the south.

And of course, if I get really cynical, I could also allow myself to speculate that at least for some folks who hang tightly onto power it hasn't been in their best interest to have an educational system that is TOO good . . . after all, we need people to do all that (previously ) low paying manual labor stuff that ppoor states do so well. The problem of course is -- business and jobs in America have chnaged and it takes more of an education to be a worker in a technological culture.

But I'll admit, I'm not a native here and I'm real sensitive about applying my own paradigms to places that aren't my own. I am more than eager to be taught Fire Ant, as I know you to be someone fully capable of asking a rhetorical question in order to create a moment of Socratic instruction  . . .