This is the resolution (below) as it stands. I have been told that we are
better off eliminating the preamble (the "whereases" for those who aren't
yet fluent in bureaucratese), since senators may question the accuracy of
the statistics, "even if" they came from the PSC and NYPIRG. The argument
is that the resolution is stronger if it isn't clouded by other
considerations. But it's our decision to make. Some thoughts:

The second "whereas" is a little weak on its own, and as I recall was
placed in the context of other states that were increasing their funding
for higher ed. We might want to delete it. Also, the third resolution is a
little unclear. What is "full funding for CUNY"? Back to free tuition? Or
back to last year's funding? There might be some better phrasing.


WHEREAS, Departments and Programs at Hunter will be unable to maintain
excellence in education under further budget cuts,

WHEREAS, 30,000 students were forced to leave CUNY when tuition was last
raised by $750 in 1996,

WHEREAS, adjusted for inflation, state appropriations for higher education
over the last decade have declined by 5%,

BE IT RESOLVED, That the Hunter College Senate opposes the governor's 2003
budget proposal to raise tuition at CUNY by $1,200,

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That the Senate opposes the governor's cuts to
financial aid programs such as SEEK and TAP

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That the Senate demands that the State of New York
restore full funding for CUNY,

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That the Senate supports and encourages the efforts
members of the Hunter community to prevent the budget cuts, and urges
President Raab to take a stronger stance on the tuition hikes.


- - - - - - - - - -
Jillian Murray
Vice Chairperson
Hunter College Senate
http://www.hunter.cuny.edu/senate
- - - - - - - - - -