Budget allocation issues accompany many of IU's campus opportunities, leaving big winners, big losers and some in the middle. We've taken top funding issues and given consideration to why each should get the green -- or be left with empty pockets.
Student health insurance\nThe benefits to providing IU students with basic health insurance are many and convincing. Such a perk would make our college even more appealing. It would especially attract bright minds from lower economic classes who might otherwise immediately join the work force instead of pursuing higher education on account of health-coverage concerns. It might also inspire students to pursue financial independence, becoming better-adjusted members of society.\nThe drawback would be the incredible cost. Substantial research would be required to determine if the projected benefits would be great enough to balance the cost of administration and implementation.\nAthletics\nIncreased athletics funding may result in the obvious benefit of a student section at IU basketball games. Also, with the large athletics budgets of other Big Ten schools (such as Ohio State, which spent $101.8 million on athletics last year), increasing monetary support for both major-income and minor-income teams could be beneficial to competition level.\nHowever, with the recent granting of the $55 million facilities upgrade, increasing athletics funding again might seem an unfair allocation of funding at an academic institution. It may also result in the reinstatement of the formerly $30 University-wide athletics fee for students.\nThe Life Sciences Initiative\nThe Life Sciences Initiative deserves funding because it will create 14,000 new jobs and 100 new companies in addition to bringing $2.4 billion in research into the state. These phenomenal results will be achieved a mere 12 years, and will greatly benefit Indiana and its citizens; a much welcomed end since IU is currently ranked seventh in the Big Ten for life science funding. \nHowever, all the $80 million requested by IU from the state for this initiative will go only to life sciences. This may lead to the weakening of other academic programs at IU, a problem the state might not be able to remedy with greater monetary contributions due to lack of funds.\nSustainability\nWith recent reports that IU is on the poor end of the spectrum of environmental consciousness, increasing funding to reduce practices that are detrimental to our environment seems like a logical step to preserve the beauty of IU and the health of its student body.\nBut in choosing what to fund, is sustainability nearly as critical as raising the quality of our educations? Or making IU more affordable? Or even clearly noticeable problems, such as the shortage of buses? And IU's sustainability task force is still being formed -- we don't even know what to fund yet!\nRed clocks\nThe most pressing need for this campus is the immediate installation of more red clocks. "Why more clocks?" you ask. Far more beneficial than any life-science initiative, these clocks contribute to the betterment of student life. Would you rather know the time or have more biologists running around? Charles Darwin was a hack. Evolution? Ick!\nDownfalls? In short: none. What's more, these new clocks will ring not with traditional chimes, but rather annoying pop-rock music. Nothing stimulates a learning environment quite like Shakira or John Mellencamp. John's right, this is our country, and it, too, is our campus. As such, we demand more clocks!
