BusinessReport.com

Posted on January 14 at 5:23 p.m.

One final addition to my previous post:

It is quite difficult for me to support Lombardi and advance an argument urging democratic debate when the job security of the chancellor is discussed behind closed doors and in personal emails. While the board and the president are privy to more specific information regarding the chancellor's job performance and while his job security should not hinge completely upon public opinion (which is often misinformed thanks to poor journalism), I do hope students and supporters are made aware of the evidence at the heart of the evaluation. I am not bowled over by the chancellor's performance thus far yet need to be convinced it is necessary to force him out if that is indeed the intent of the board, the president, or both.

On TWO CENTS: Publisher takes LSU’s president and Board to task

Posted on January 14 at 3:20 p.m.

I am rather disappointed in your vague (and misleading) discussion of events concerning O'Keefe, Lombardi, and LSU. Although I have moved away from Baton Rouge after graduating from LSU, I do my best to stay informed about what goes on at my beloved Alma Mater and often turn to your publication for updates.

TOPS, while full of merit, cannot continue unchanged forever. A great amount of discussion is needed to ensure that TOPS continues to serve its original purpose. Even as an out-of-state resident who did not (directly) benefit from TOPS, I still have an understanding about its importance to the state as well as the somewhat negative role it plays in keeping down tuition costs despite the need to increase funding for the University, funding that should in part come from those who benefit from a University degree. The TOPS discussion is indeed part of a very large and important national debate about the rise of tuition and the weakened power of the middle class. Do not attempt to discredit Lombardi--who offered a much-needed and insightful assessment of the program--without a more honest look at TOPS.

Furthermore, it is well documented (in this publication no less) that education is one of the first government programs in Louisiana that takes a hit when it is time to trim the budget. To insist that the funding for roads is in no way connected to the money for LSU is misguided and shortsighted. Lombardi raised a valid point that you seek to dismiss in a manner reminiscent of tactics used by those who oppose progress for the fine state of Louisiana.

Again, I am quite amazed at the manner with which you waved off these concerns. Forgive me for wanting to continue a healthy democratic debate about very important policies. I am worried less about business support for the University than I am about the support and benefits that LSU can provide to ALL people in the state, rich and poor, businessman and farmer. One of these benefits is educating citizens and promoting democratic discussion. You do those same citizens no service by cheapening the debate.

Granted, you were very explicit about the value of what you had to say. Unfortunately, this treatment of the issues does nothing but obscure the deep problems that need to be addressed and instead engage in a thinly veiled attack on one man's character. Sir, at least contribute a mere two cents next time.

On TWO CENTS: Publisher takes LSU’s president and Board to task