Three strikes, athletics fee, and you are out

Published: Wednesday, March 28, 2007

Updated: Sunday, May 2, 2010 10:05

Daniel Glossenger

During Student Senate elections April 11, not only will you select your senators, senior senators and super-duper senators, but also you'll be asked to vote on whether Truman athletics are worth $100 a year of your own money.

Now don't get me wrong. I think supporting Truman athletics is a fabulous idea. I think the March 15 Letter to the Editor from Don Sternberg was right on the money - our football team should never have to suffer injuries and defeats because of a bad field. And I'm not entirely opposed to the idea of supporting the team with my cold hard cash. But before we all jump on the "I love the athletics fee" bandwagon, let's stop, calm down and just think for a moment about some of the consequences.

The first trouble with the athletics fee is the conflicting goals of its promoteras. Student Senate President Angela Crawford claimed that "The people working on this want to see how students feel," according to the March 1 Index. And the athletics fee research committee suggested students should have a chance to vote and "assess themselves" about the fee, according to gobulldogs.truman.edu.

But really, it seems like the "people working on this" would rather form opinions ahead of student elections in favor of the fee than find out how students feel. The athletics department has been visiting with athletes to drum up support, while taking out ads in the Index that promote the fee. Although forums in April will allow for student opinions, I suspect they will be more a way for the athletics department to prop up the fee against very real student concerns.

The second problem with this sort of thing is that it presents a slippery slope. The faculty committee charged with studying the athletics program claimed that "athletics is an integral component of Truman's liberal arts culture," according to the March 1 Index. But I think I can claim that the library is an integral component of Truman's liberal arts culture. And you know what? I even think that Truman art programs are integral, too.

In spite of this, I don't see the pro-fee folk supporting a $40 fee for checking out library books. Nor do I see much gung-ho attitude for a $25 fee for new tools for the sculpture students.

I certainly don't see people taking out ads in the newspaper for renovating the Baldwin Auditorium, although I'd like to think that Baldwin of all places is integral to the University "culture," and its condition is as shameful as any on campus. So what's to stop other deserving departments from claiming their part? Nothing at all - and we'd be obligated to support them by the same logic that the athletics department wants you to support their fee.

Finally, student money from the athletics fee doesn't coincide with nearly enough guaranteed student oversight. Student Senate supports a provision that requires that the fee be reviewed in 2010 by the Student Organizational Fees Committee. To put it bluntly, that's just not good enough. By 2010, the athletics department will have spent more than $1.5 million of student money on lights, toilets and weights.

An oversight committee has been proposed, which might include a Senate representative, two athletes and a student-at-large, but Director of Athletics Jerry Wollmering also might advise or even be on this committee. Although Wollmering is a fine athletics director, I can't help but feel this is a conflict of interest.

And there's no guarantee that this proposed fee won't simply become a football booster fund, a concern of many Truman athletes. The athletics department has been just "talking about doing" various things, according to Crawford. For me, that's not enough to shell out $100 a year.

I can't support this fee even though I'd love to. The facilities are subpar, and Truman athletes deserve much better. There are just too many uncertainties involved for such a high cost. With three looming problems, there also are three strikes. I'm no sports fanatic, but this fee is a simple strikeout.

Daniel Glossenger is a junior history major

from Nashville, Tenn.