Larry D. Lauer

In the last several posts I have been discussing the consequences of state budget problems.  After spending some time listening to debate in Austin last week, I concluded that the way the Texas Tuition Equalization Grant (TEG) originally was enacted is a great example of bi-partisan statesmanship.

Enacted more than 30 years ago this grant was based on a fundamental American idea…a strong dual system of higher education. Early colleges were all private, and when the the public system evolved the concept of preserving a strong dual system became basic to our democracy.

Preserving that dual system is what the TEG is all about. It originally was seen as bi-partisan and non-political. This was so because it both stengthened a diverse group of large and small private colleges while it was designed to save the taxpayer money.

The basic idea was: If a modest grant enabled a student with financial need to fill a space in a private college, and if that grant was less in amount than it would cost the taxpayer if that student enrolled in a public university, then such a grant would actually save the taxpayer and the state money.

As explained in a previous post, today the TEG actually saves Texas taxpayers around $4,000 for each student that chooses the grant over enrollment in a public university.

However, this 30-year benefit to the taxpayer can actually fall victim to the partsian ideology that is polarizing our legislature today. Maybe one day we will return to the time when bi-partisan statesmanship was possible, and America will be made whole again.

Read Full Post »

Is bipartisanship possible in this day of polarized communication? These are indeed challenging times for those in the world of professional political strategic communication.

It seems that being a Democrat means that you believe in strong government, a growing middle class, worker welfare, help for the disadvantaged, and some regulation of big business.  It seems that being a Republican means you are pro-business, support a strong military, favor free enterprise, believe in little or no regulation, and think that less government is better.

In my way of thinking, bipartisanship does not begin with political ideology, but rather with the desire to solve social and economic problems. It accepts some  compromise in order to move forward, and acknowledges that every step forward will require adjustments along the way. It also accepts that some decisions could very well be temporary  and are likely to be significantly altered later on.

In my international travels I often encounter what I refer to as “the idea of America as seen from abroad.” It comes through to me this way: America stands for individual freedom, but not the right to infringe on someone else’s.  It imagines a government that will defend the US, regulate corporate greed, take care of those who can’t make it on their own…but is not a huge wasteful bureaucracy.

The reality in the US today is that the professional political communication strategist specializes in advancing either the Democratic Party’s ideology, the Republican Party’s ideology, or a bipartisan problem- solving strategy.  The latter exercise begins with brainstorming the major issues, putting them in priority order, developing a practical strategic and tactical plan for taking steps forward, and then evaluating and adjusting from there.

Some call this bipartisan approach to problem-solving “statesmanship.” I could not agree more, and it is missing all to often in our political discourse today. I hope and pray we will all come to our senses very soon.

Read Full Post »

It looks like I will be spending a lot of time in Austin this spring. As with most states, Texas is facing a major budget deficit. The word is that everything is fair game to be cut, including education. I work for a private institution, but even so, a state-funded financial aid program helps over 1,300 college-age Texan attend TCU.

How does one develop a communication strategy for this kind of situation?  Do you sound an alarm about how devastating a worst case scenario can be for these students and your institution? Or, is there a better approach?

I have faced financial crises on many levels in the past.  Sometimes it was a potential enrollment drop. Other times it was an anticipated institutional budget short-fall. More recently is was concerns about the potential impact of a declining economy on endowments.

Each time, even though each situation had its differences, what they all had in common was that the primary strategic message had to be: This institution is ready and able to manage the situation successfully, and it will be transparent about developments as the situation unfolds.

It is also critically important to demonstrate through these times that the institution’s leadership is talented and self-confident about staying the course. In other words, positive brand messaging becomes more important than ever.

In the case of what I will face in Austin, each student that enrolls in a public institution costs the taxpayer more than $7,500. With the Texas Tuition Equalization Grant (TEG), the taxpayer pays only $3,500 to help a student attend a private institution…saving more than $4,000 with each enrollment. Plus, it gives these students a choice, and helps maintain more financially-diverse student bodies in the private sector. In total, this program enables 30,400 Texas families with financial need to attend more than 35 private colleges, many with available spaces. This is a true win-win situation.

Because this program actually saves money for Texans, we will press ahead, asserting that we are confident that the state will continue to fund this program adequately. And along with this message, will be one that TCU’s leadership and best academic talent stands ready to be part of the solution.

Lesson learned: In any time of financial concern, be as transparent as you can, but also enhance the communication of your positive brand identity, and make sure that what ultimately comes though is that your institution has the talent and strength to continue moving a head.

Read Full Post »