 |
 |
HOUSE HIGHER ED HEARS PROP. 2 PROPOSED CHANGES On Tuesday, House committee members dealing with higher education funding heard that some of their budget items would undoubtedly need word changes based on Proposal 2006-2, while another program - funding for Indian college students - spurred controversy over whether it is legal under the constitutional amendment, which bans racial preferences. Civil Rights Director Linda Parker told the House Appropriations Higher Education Subcommittee that while the report last week found that programs that seek to attract black or women students would need some rewording to make them legal, the Michigan Indian Tuition Waiver program is still legal because it has political roots based on treaties, instead of relying on race or ethnicity. Rep. David Agema (R-Grandville) disagreed, saying that he thinks that based on other states' legal history, it would be best to get an attorney general opinion on the matter. Allie Greenleaf Maldonado, assistant general legal counsel for the Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians, said that without the waiver program, she never would have attended the University of Michigan and had the opportunity to become a force for change and improvement in her community. She asked the committee to not only keep the funding, but to adopt an annual review process of how many registered tribal members attend each school so that funding is dispersed according to attendance. Right now, Ms. Maldonado said, funding stays set at steady levels adopted in the mid-1990's and leaves some schools over funded, while others who have higher levels of native students get too little funding. Rep. Gary McDowell (D-Rudyard), said that he supports the change and retaining the funding because he has seen the huge impact education has had on the native community. "I have seen a massive improvement in the quality of life for Indian people and the tuition grant is a big part of that," he said. Some of the programs outlined that will need rewording according to the Civil Rights Commission are the Morris Hood Jr., Future Educators and Visiting Professors programs, which the commission said all appear to exclude some people by seeking to attract minorities. Ms. Parker noted, however, that the College Day program, which the report outlined as an unlawful program under the proposal, the commission now says is legal since it actually ties to federal funds that determine eligibility by income. The information about federal funding wasn't available at the time the report was published, she said.