Gov. Snyder announced as UM's Commencement Speaker
UM just annouced (hour ago) that Rick Snyder will be the speaker at commencement.
This is bound to get political, but at the same time is major UM news, so mods do with this what you see best.
Without choosing a political side, it is safe to say that UM is going to come under fire for having a Governor that is endorsing major cuts to UM speak at their commencement.
Now, Snyder is a 3-time UM grad, lives and built his business in Ann Arbor, and attends all MBB games, but some people in the education world are not going to be happy with this.
EDIT: Edited to clarify/tone down a point.
This may also be a great opportunity for Snyder to address the importance of public education and Michigan's role in the public education sphere.
March 14th, 2011 at 11:07 AM ^
This is absolutely not a controversial decision. Muammar Gaddafi would be a controversial speaker. Not the Governor with season tickets to Michigan Basketball.
March 14th, 2011 at 11:26 AM ^
Check out the University's Facebook page and the comments following the annoucement. I think there's going to be some serious pushback against Snyder.
March 14th, 2011 at 11:56 AM ^
Facebook is generally for attention whores. I don't think comments on a public Facebook page represent the general sentiment towards anything. One year ago we also had our state governor speak after cutting University funding.
March 14th, 2011 at 12:46 PM ^
"Facebook is generally for attention whores"
Best comment of the day, hands down.
March 14th, 2011 at 12:52 PM ^
Don't even get him started on boldface type.
I'd say that nearly 4,000 UofM students in just one day is fairly significant pushback.
https://www.msa.umich.edu/upetition/p/ReconsiderRickSnyder/
if a number of people object to it and make their opposition known then BY DEFINITION it is.
Snyder is part of a larger, controversial wave of public officials who are trying to do away with employee collective bargaining, break teachers' unions, and do away with the last vestiges of the welfare state. You may back him; you may attack him. But he is controversial. The fact that he has been given a platform--and further stature--by the U to speak is bound, in its turn, to be controversial here, too. This is a matter of fact.
By this definition, anyone who has ever spoken at a graduation ceremony in history could be considered a "Controversial Figure". Gov. Snyder has gone out of his way to not be associated with the happenings in Wisconsin and other states.
March 14th, 2011 at 11:05 AM ^
pick... and it needs to be no more political in the announcement and respect as when Pres Obama was commencement speaker.
A new governor has a standing invite as far as I know. In '85 we had Jim Blanchard, which was not all that inspiring. Politicians are adept at using a lot of words to say nothing, which is likely what will happen this time. The difference here is that Snyder is a U of M grad (Blanchard went to MSU) and the state is in an extremely tight bind financially. Hopefully Snyder will use this address to talk frankly with what is obviously a very liberal audience that might be less than accomodating toward him. None of these problems are going to get solved until everyone starts pulling together a little bit.
March 14th, 2011 at 11:06 AM ^
of the state and a UM grad. He is a great pick in my opinion. When President Obama spoke last year everyone mostly agreed that it should be an honor for any President to speak at your commencement. The same should be said of a Governor, no matter what a person's political stance is.
March 14th, 2011 at 12:00 PM ^
We've had just about every governor speak at commencement regardless of whether they have a UofM degree or not. Consider this one has three, its a no brainer.
he didnt accept the MSU invite as I would bet was offered to him.
March 14th, 2011 at 11:08 AM ^
I had Kofi Annan as my commencement speaker. Pretty awesome.
March 14th, 2011 at 12:03 PM ^
After you're done saying "WHO?" (and I answer you that she's an M grad who penned the comic strip "Cathy") I can tell you the combo of her and rain made me skip my own graduation and take my family to Zingerman's instead.
I've been told multiple times that the rule for our graduation speakers is that they must either be a big name head of state level politician or they have to be a UofM grad.
I was at the Spring '94 commencement with the family of my best friend who was graduating. Couple that with the horrible weather and an epic hangover from the previous night's revelry, the "Cathy" commencement ranks as one of the worst afternoons of my life. Zingerman's was the right choice!
March 15th, 2011 at 12:23 AM ^
Guisewite
Not that I really care.
March 14th, 2011 at 11:08 AM ^
Last two Governors have also spoken at UM's Commencement, although Engler's speech was during Winter Commencement.
March 14th, 2011 at 11:09 AM ^
Better than getting the CIO of Google or whoever it was to drone on and on. This guy is a major political figure so he's legit. More importantly he can use the speech to address the issue of brain drain of how most of Michigan's grads leave the state to find work. I think it would be good to have him fire up a class and try to convince them to remain in Michigan.
I assume we're mostly doing this to butter him up and get more money out of the state.
March 14th, 2011 at 11:22 AM ^
More importantly he can use the speech to address the issue of brain drain of how most of Michigan's grads leave the state to find work.
But this is precisely the reason that Snyder should NOT be the speaker. He is immediately responsible for another round of young adult flight from the State. By killing the film industry (the only new industry in the state), he is also causing great harm to the hospitality industry (which benefitted from the film biz). Synder can't address the brain drain because he doesn't even understand that he is part of the problem.
Young people want interesting jobs and nightlife options - how is Snyder going to "fire up a class and try to convince them to remain in Michigan"? Is he going to say something like, "The corporate tax cuts I've proposed move us closer to being a state like South Dakota. So I say to you today - let us become the new South Dakota! Who's with me!!!!"
March 14th, 2011 at 11:31 AM ^
You just proved my point for me. He's the governor and his policies will set tone for if people want to remain here. Michigan's graduation is a venue where he can speak directly to the young adults the state desperately needs to keep and try to keep in the state.
I won't even touch the political issues, since we're not supposed to do politics on this board, but your comment just proves his policies impact if young adults are going to stay or go. So he's a speaker our graduates are going to want to hear to determine if they go or stay.
March 14th, 2011 at 11:42 AM ^
You're right that his policies certainly have an impact. The impact has already been enormous. I realize the board isn't supposed to get political, and it's nice to have a "major" graduation speaker, but a guy who just ended a "youth" industry in Michigan is a poor choice to speak on how to keep young people in the state. It's like asking Rick James to speak to a battered women's clinic about preventing abuse.
March 14th, 2011 at 12:05 PM ^
I'm in the film industry and was looking forward to the possibility of working in Michigan. Now, not a chance.
Dahblue, to hear you say it, you'd think Michigan was some paradise for young adults before January 2011. The exodus of young college grads from this state has been ongoing for a good decade.
Not at all. The state has been bleeding young talent for years now. Granholm had the right idea (and terrible name) with the "Cool Cities" initiative. She then completely ignored the situation and her office even failed to read paid-for reports on the subject. Anyway...
My point is that it's essential to reverse that trend. The film incentives have actually been working in that regard. Snyder realizes the importance of bringing in young talent, but his actions are having the opposite effect. It's just very shortsighted. Young people aren't going to come back just for giggles. They certainly aren't going to move back because of corporate tax rates (see, for example, South Dakota). There needs to be a reason. Ending that reason (which costs less than the state's "Pure Michigan" ad campaign) is immensely regrettable.
So because you disagree with his politics he shouldn't speak at the ceremony? I think it is great we had President Obama and now the Governor, especially a U of M grad.
No. That's not at all my point. I don't think he should speak at the commencement because young adults (and education) are victims of his politics. I wouldn't ask Ike Turner to speak at a battered women's clinic either.
March 14th, 2011 at 11:44 AM ^
I don't think most kids are going to care much about what he has to say. Most out of state kids never had the slightest intention of staying here and a lot of in-state kids want to escape and would want to even if there were good jobs here for a combination of weather, interesting urban areas, and new life experiences.
March 14th, 2011 at 11:32 AM ^
I think young people want jobs period. There just isn't much available in Michigan right now.
March 14th, 2011 at 12:55 PM ^
I am not sure if I can manage to say this without skating into the verboten topic of politics, but:
I don't think it's true that he doesn't "get it." Who doesn't get that the film industry is exciting? Who doesn't get that it's a draw for interesting young talent? Who doesn't get that film crews spend a lot of money while here, and hire people too? Who doesn't get that it's a huge morale boost to have film crews roll into town with big names and famous faces?
I think ultimately it came down to the math (which not everyone agrees on) and what price you put on something like morale-boosting (which also not everyone agrees on). It seems clear to me from statements, etc, that the decision was based on the above, not some lack of understanding of the brain drain.
We might rue the decision, and we might also disagree with the way Snyder et al figured the economic & other gains to the State. But I don't think it was made in ignorance.
We're talking about a guy who had both an MBA and J.D. from Michigan by the age of 23. He's no dummy.
That doesn't mean he's got the interests of the individual/working class/average person at heart.
FWIW, I'm completely undecided on Snyder. I just think it's dangerous to say "Oh, this guy knows what he's doing because he has X degrees" when it might just mean he's that much better at exploiting his constituents.
Just sayin' about that sort of sentiment, not sayin' I think Snyder is evil or anything.
A dummy? Of course not.
A guy who can make bad decisions? Absolutely. Look, he put Gateway in South Dakota to take advantage of their business tax climate. The company eventually shipped jobs overseas (because lower wages worked as incentives) and evenually moved the HQ to California (because a talent base is a bigger incentive for success than lower corporate taxes). Ideology never works in the real world. If Snyder were right about this, South Dakota would be the most desired state in the union.
I would love to respond to all of your weird arguments, but I will respect the (almost) unspoken no political talk rule of mgoblog.
Look at it this way - Snyder has expanded Pure Michigan funding (a good idea in my opinion) which promotes the state of Michigan through advertising. That program costs MORE than the film incentives - which also promote Michigan (while also creating an entirely new industry and helping the hospitality industry whose growth is ranked last in the nation).
So...spend less and get more results, and Snyder opposes it purely out of ideology (because Snyder opposes all incentives). That, to me, is ignorant.
1. The film tax incentives are stiil in place and will remain in place until his budget is passed. Furthermore, the film industry is not a major source of full time jobs for young adults. So your comments about the film industry are not based in fact, but opinion. I will not express my opinion on the film tax incentive due to the second item of my response. Speaking of which...
2. No politics.
1. No politics...but you make a political argument.
2. Snyder can end the inventives without the budget process. He has effectively ended the program just by announcing his intent. The film industry (according to Ernst & Young) brings in $6 to Michigan businesses for every $1 spent by the state. You make an enormous mistake in attempting to judge the success of a nearly new program by looking at "full time film industry jobs". Those take years to create. Think about $6 for every dollar spent. Think about hospitality jobs, filled hotel rooms, leased commercial property, etc. My comments about the film industry are based in fact...By the way, what happened to The Avengers? I heard that was supposed to film in Michigan.
3. Don't accuse someone of not using facts when you offer none.
Cut backs in the hospitality industry equals "brain drain"?
This issue seems like more of a concern for MSU grads.
While I like to rip MSU as much as the next guy...look at it this way...
Successful Michigan graduates like to go out for food and drink after a hard day at the office doing great things and making lots of money. They often live in cities like NYC, Chicago, LA, London, etc. that give them many different hospitality options. When they travel, they stay in the better hotels (i.e. 60 Thompson in NYC and not Howard Johnson in Queens). To improve the state of Michigan, young talented adults (i.e. Wolverines) need to be lured. They need hospitality (food, drink, lodging) options or else there is no social world of interest. In short, low corporate taxes are swell - if you're 58, puffing a cigar, getting your shoes shined and talking about your 401(k). Spending a little bit of money to revitalize one industry, grow another and get positive PR for the state is a no-brainer.
In short, name any growing/bustling state and I promise you'll find a thriving/growing hospitality industry.
March 14th, 2011 at 11:42 AM ^
I liked Larry Page and I'm pretty damn sure he's going to have had a bigger impact on humanity than Rick Snyder and indeed very possibly Barack Obama when it's all said and done.
I don't think Rick Snyder is exactly popular with young people.
March 14th, 2011 at 11:58 AM ^
Not.
March 14th, 2011 at 12:23 PM ^
Dude needs a new haircut.
March 14th, 2011 at 12:31 PM ^
How is Lloyd Brady not in this picture?
He must be a Democrat [not political]
/ didyouseewhatididthere
March 14th, 2011 at 12:33 PM ^
its hard to know what the student sections true feelings are. Lloyd Brady can tell it all with a smile or a frown.
And a small complaint; What's up with the blue sweater Rick? A season ticket holder should know better.
never realized that the maize rage was such a sausagefest. theres one girl right there in the middle (i know her actually). tell me, can you see a single, other woman in that picture?
Is like a really, really easy version of "Where's Waldo"
Not if you're looking for Lloyd Brady, as I am. This is the best Where's Waldo evar.
Well this says voters 18-40 are split to slightly agianst him:
http://www.wzzm13.com/news/article/155950/2/Gov-Rick-Snyder-losing-lust…
Your guess is as good as mine as to whether that would shift more if you took the 18-25 or so demographic...
March 14th, 2011 at 11:10 AM ^
I don't think his cuts to the university are that controversial. The only debatable thing now, without getting political, is whether to call UM a Public School anymore. Something like less than 5% of the budget now comes from the state. I believe in the early goings it used to be something like 70%.
March 14th, 2011 at 11:20 AM ^
I assume Michigan will always play lip service to being a public school. If for no other reason than it lets us pull out the eniment domain card any time we need to bite off a section of Ann Arbor.
We've been operating as law unto ourselves for years though. Various ultra conservative state reps have been screaming about the research work we do (namely abortion and homosexuality issues) and we've been telling them to get bent for years. Tuition, the endowment, alumni giving and federal grants have been keeping the boat afloat for the past decade. If anything we're a federal university, my lab alone sits on 600 million in active CDC/NIH grants and we could care less about the state. When we need cash we call up our sugar daddies at the federal level. Hospital overally is sitting on something like 60 billion plus another 18 million from patient care revenue. A few hundred million less from the state is no big deal for us.
Federal government for funding, state government for eminent domain and undergrads for slave labor.