The Conflicted Virginia University

Virginia’s schools of higher learning are among those universities most at the center of issues of conflicts in research, according to a new publication of the American Association of University Professors.

The most recent edition of the AAUP’s “Academe: the Conflicted University” publication includes examples of Virginia schools as it examines how seriously academic freedom and research can be conflicted.

One article, “The Costs of a Climate of Fear,” reports just how gingerly researchers into climate change issues must tread these days because of the highly-polarized, political fervor surrounding the issue.

In California, for instance, one researcher at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory got a message about his global warming work. His doorbell rang and when he answered, there was a dead rat on his doorstep and a man driving away while shouting obscenities.

In Virginia, the approach might be more civil, but it is far more serious, namely right-wing Atty. Gen’s continued assault on global warming research at the University of Virginia. The report’s author, Michael Halpern of the Union of Concerned Scientists, reviews how Cuccinelli has doggedly gone after former U.Va. researcher Michael Mann for alleged fraud, even though several academic reviews have cleared him of any wrong-doing.

Attorneys general from across the nation are watching closely to see how the “Cooch” gambit plays out, but Halpern notes: “a court of law is not the place to settle scientific disagreements, and an attorney general should not be in the business of evaluating scientific research.”

Another part of the AAUP study delves into an issue dear to Virginia’s heart: tobacco. Author Allan M. Brandt dead of the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences at Harvard, notes that more and more schools are refusing tobacco research money, including the business school at the University of Texas at Austin, the Emory University School of Medicine, Harvard Medical and Public Health Schools and Johns Hopkins.

The University of Virginia accepted $25 million in research money from Philip Morris in 2007, Brandt reports, although he doesn’t mention the controversy three years ago in which it was revealed that Virginia Commonwealth University had accepted research money from Philip Morris USA along with agreements keeping the deals secret. After a national firestorm, VCU admitted its mistake and agreed to no longer accept such one-sided contracts, although it still will get tobacco money.

Brandt notes that at least one federal court judge has found Philip Morris guilty of racketeering charges by conspiring to keep secret tobacco’s health dangers and that the firm and other tobacco companies have been effective in shouting down research findings they believe are bad for their business. Brandt has been an expert witness for the government in legal cases involving tobacco.

The sad part about tobacco is that it has been deeply ingrained in Virginia history since Jamestown. Philip Morris employs about 6,000 people in the state, mostly in Richmond, and is a major contributor to charities and arts such as symphonies and festivals. Their money is welcome since some other corporate donors have gone belly up.

But one has to wonder why such big name schools as Harvard, Johns Hopkins and UT Austin all ban tobacco money outright and what makes Virginia continue to treat the weed with such reverence.

As for global warming, the AAUP is right that Cuccinelli’s “going rogue” harassment of U.Va. smacks of the politically-charged witch hunts of the Joe McCarthy era. And with the Republicans winning big Nov. 2, the issue won’t go away.

Peter Galuszka


ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)




Comments


Comments

38 responses to “The Conflicted Virginia University”

  1. If someone buys my hay, why do I care whether they got the money doing social work or building bombs?

  2. Tobacco has been deeply ingrained in Virginia history since Jamestown. That much is a fact.

    I don't see much point in classifying such history as sad. At this point, it is what it is.

    The only pertinent thing is what do we do next?

  3. Here is a nifty gadget that compares property taxes between localities.

    http://www.mytaxburden.org/propertytax/

  4. Verifies what I have been claiming.

    If you look at Fairfax and Loudoun compared to Fauquier, they pay a lot more taxes.

    But the tax as a percent of home value and the tax as a persent of income are not much different.

    Low tax advocates would argue that you are better off living in Fauquier. (They would also claim that business would grow faster there, and we know that isn;t true.)

    But what they are missing is that people in Fairfax and loudoun own proerty that is a lot more valuable, and they earn more money to pay the taxes with.

    Getting the low taxes that come with Fauquier also means your property is worth less and you will earn less. It is hard to see how lower taxes alnoe, make one "better off".

    And that isn't counting the difference of what you get for the taxes you pay. Probably the core services cost about the same, and the higher taxes in Fairfax and Loudoun get you a lot of extras.

  5. Anonymous Avatar

    The above comment by ‘hydra’ has no apparent relationship to the original post.

    It has no relationship to reality and demonstrates what Prof. Risse calls an acute case of Geographic Illiteracy compounded by Municipalism.

    “If you look at Fairfax and Loudoun compared to Fauquier, they pay a lot more taxes.”

    There is no valid basis for comparison of three dissimilar municipalities.

    There are some similarities and basis for comparison between some parts of eastern Loudoun and some parts of Fairfax and some parts of Prince William.

    There are some similarities and some basis for comparison between some parts of western Loudoun and some parts of Fauquier.

    Unless those parts are sorted on a statistically rational basis there is no possibility of making rational or valid comparisons.

    There is no statistical validity in comparing averages or means of dissimilar geographies.

    “Low tax advocates would argue that you are better off living in Fauquier.”

    These advocates would have no more reason to argue that than hydra has to say it.

    “But what they are missing is that people in Fairfax and Loudoun own property that is a lot more valuable, and they earn more money to pay the taxes with.”

    The ‘average value’ of property and the ‘average wage’ at the Community, Village, Neighborhood or Cluster scale has more to do with the radial distance from the Zentrum than any other parameter.

    The two measures have nothing to do with one another except for radial distance and there is no way to move Fauquier closer to the Capitol, to K Street or to Rosslyn.

    Two invalid assumptions do not make a valid one.

    ACSGP

  6. Anonymous is correct, it has no relationship to the original post. I was merely responding to Darrell.

    ==================================

    “If you look at Fairfax and Loudoun compared to Fauquier, they pay a lot more taxes.”

    There is no valid basis for comparison of three dissimilar municipalities.

    Taxes on the median home in Fairfax and loudoun are much higher than the median home in Fauquier. therefore, on average taxes are higher in those counties than in Fairfax. If AGSGP/EMR had read my post he would see that I also point out the dissimilarity in services. Therefore the taxes are not comparable, and we agree on that point.

    ================================

    "There are some similarities and some basis for comparison between some parts of western Loudoun and some parts of Fauquier."

    This is an idiotic statement. Taxes in Western Loudoun are the same as in Eastern Loudoun. If you are comparing taxes the comparison applies to the entire county.

    ================================

    "The ‘average value’ of property and the ‘average wage’ at the Community, Village, Neighborhood or Cluster scale has more to do with the radial distance from the Zentrum than any other parameter."

    Another idiotic sttement, and this one isnt even correct. 30 to 40 years ago the average income and average home value in Loudoun and Fauquier were almost identical, and niether county has moved since then. The difference is that Loudoun pursued a policy of agressive growth and Fauquier pursued a policy of conservation.

    As a result the per person income and the per person accumulated wealth (per capita assessed value) are significantly higher in Loudoun, even after the difference in taxes is accounted for.

    There is nothing wrong with Fauquiers decision, but it is not free, and it is not a cost savings to citizens as is often described. The cost savings argument is an outright lie, or else it demonstrates complete and utter ignorance of basic cost analysis.

    The cost of Fauquiers conservation effort amounts to thousands of dollars every year and tens of thousands in eventual accumulated wealth, compared to Loudoun. And Loudoun (and Fairfax) gets the benefit of services that Fauquier does not provide.

    ==================================

    "There is no statistical validity in comparing averages or means of dissimilar geographies."

    The mean in one area is calculated the same as the mean in another area. Both values are statistically valid. AGSGP/EMR is entitled to his opinion, but not to his own facts. We can disagree about why the mean is higher in one area than another, but the basic reason is that people in Loudoun and Fairfax have been allowed to improve their properties and in Fauquier they are mostly prohibited. The means are higher becasue the values are higher, Fauquier has deliberately fought to keep values low, and uses every means possible to make new construction artificially expensive. Distance may also be a partial factor.

  7. It is forty seevn miles from Downtown DC to Warrenton and 35 miles to Leesburg. The difference in driving time is ten minutes during non rush hour.

    It is hardly enough to justify the vast differences in earning power and owned value between the two locations.

  8. “Low tax advocates would argue that you are better off living in Fauquier.”

    These advocates would have no more reason to argue that than hydra has to say it.

    ================================

    OK, so the low tax advocates are wrong, which is just what I claimed. I might also be wrong, but that is a separate issue. I don;t think I'm wrong because the facts are clear. 40 years agoe people in those two counties owned property that was valued the same and earned the same amount of money.

    Today they do not, so we can say that one county's policies were better for its people than the others. Or else, we can say that Fauquier has accumulated a lot of conservation benefits that make up for the difference: that people in Fauquier are actually just as well off, but the market does not measure the difference.

    In that case, the cost(value) of conservation is equal to the difference in earned income and retained earnings.

  9. I'm surprised no one jumped on my comment about "Why do I care where the money came from?"

    If UVA didn't accept Dirty Tobacco Money, would that hurt the tobacco compnies?

  10. Anonymous Avatar

    Nuclear plants occupy a small fraction of the land required for solar and wind power.

  11. Anonymous Avatar

    "I'm surprised no one jumped on my comment about "Why do I care where the money came from?"

    Perhaps no one care what you think or say?

  12. I'm pretty surprised that neither Bacon nor Groveton have proffered their views on the Deficit Commission recommendations.

    I was hoping to hear from both.

  13. "…but the basic reason is that people in Loudoun and Fairfax have been allowed to improve their properties and in Fauquier they are mostly prohibited. The means are higher becasue the values are higher, Fauquier has deliberately fought to keep values low, and uses every means possible to make new construction artificially expensive. Distance may also be a partial factor.".

    Properties in Fairfax are more valuable than properties in Fauquier because there are more jobs in and around Fairfax than in and around Fauquier.

    It really is just that simple.

    Same reason the properties in Fauquier are worth more than the properties in Lee County.

    Low tax advocates (presumably a pseudonym for conservatives) would argue that people should suffer the minimal inconveniences required to live in an area with economic opportunity. The best way to keep taxes low is to keep people employed so that a high percentage of families make enough money to pay taxes. When only 54% of wage earners pay taxes the taxes on that 54% are certain to be high.

    I am very supportive of people who are trying hard to find work or working hard to improve their economic position by bettering themselves. These are the people who should be the beneficiaries of various wealth transfers euphemistically called taxes. These are the people who might make that 54% number higher.

    However, I have no sympathy for those who refuse to suffer inconvenience for economic betterment while demanding a steady river of government benefits. For example, I have no sympathy for able bodied people seeking government handouts who live in areas of chronic unemployment because "that's where I grew up". If you choose to live (unemployed) in a place where there are too few jobs you have essentially elected early retirement. While this is a fine personal choice it is just that … a personal choice. Pay for it yourself.

    Here's what it takes to get into the Northern Virginia Community College …

    "If you have a high school diploma or the equivalent, or you are at least 18 years of age, and you are able to benefit from enrollment, you are eligible for admission to Northern Virginia Community College.".

    That's it.

    It costs $122.95 per credit hour to attend NoVa CC. There are considerable avenues of financial aid and deferred payment options. Many of the classes are offered at night. Many of the classes are offered as hybrid online / classroom study for more flexibility.

    So, let me ask a fundamental question. What number of the 48% of American wage earners who pay no taxes are unable to improve their economic position? What number are able to improve their position but simply choose not to do so?

    Before we start blaming zoning laws and George Bush or Barack Obama … before we blame big business or big government, let's ask a hard question …

    Have too many Americans just gotten fat, dumb (i.e. willingly uneducated) and lazy?

  14. re: " Have too many Americans just gotten fat, dumb (i.e. willingly uneducated) and lazy?"

    many of those you did name – I agree but add to that all those folks who now benefit from all the tax breaks and loopholes identified in the deficit commission who correctly stated that they harpooned every whale in the sea….

    Here's the report for those who have not read it:

    http://www.fiscalcommission.gov/sites/fiscalcommission.gov/files/documents/CoChair_Draft.pdf

    It's 50 pages and a very good read and I support EVERY recommendation in it (and more).

    Take a few minutes and go through it.

    I'm not amazed at the reaction of Pelosi and the tax&spend types who are horrified

    But I AM amazed at the so called fiscal conservatives who have said precious little about it ..much less support it…

    what gives?

    here we have a real honest balance budget proposal and the fiscal conservatives are out back in the alley taking an extended smoke break.

  15. Well LarryG … I've been a bit busy earning the money I use to pay the taxes which fund Barack Obama's socialist fantasy land.

    However, I have seen highlights of the deficit commission recommendations and I like them. I saw Erskine Bowles give a short summary speech and I saw Alan Simpson do the same.

    The flat tax proposal is particularly good. As I've written in the past … my friends in Germany are successful businessmen and pay a lot of taxes. However, they pay those taxes via a two page tax return. This simple approach creates a great deal of transparency as to who is paying what. In today's America I wonder of anybody knows who is paying what.

    The mortgage deduction needs to end too. So do subsidies and exceptions for certain types of businesses … like farms. Hydra will say that the large farms get virtually all the subsidies. Fine. That should make it all the easier to end those subsidies.

    I personally think the deficit commission has done a good job. Some will say they haven't gone far enough. I say that a person who is 100 pounds overweight should try walking before they try running. Let's get these changes implemented. Then, we can try more drastic action if (when?) needed.

  16. some folks "earn" money while others donate their time which is also a form of "earning" if you think about it.

    It's "earning" for someone besides yourself, eh?

    Oh.. and it's pretty much not taxed either…

    but I digress….

    Groveton – how about a good substantial blog on the deficit commission report?

    how about a blow-by-blow of the major proposals?

    I'd be especially appreciate if you could get the ball rolling.

    I SWEAR – I thought you self-avowed fiscal conservatives would have jumped on this like a dog on a bone…

    what gives?

  17. Properties in Fairfax are more valuable than properties in Fauquier because there are more jobs in and around Fairfax than in and around Fauquier.

    =============================

    That is partly true, but it is a chicken and egg thing. Fauquier has actively discouraged new business because it would bring more people and housing, and they have discouraged housing that would bring new business.

    Nor is it only Fauquier. My home in Alexandria would not be allowed under todays rules, and I would be much poorer as a result.

    30 or forty years of Fauquier policies have created the differences that impoverish Fauquier residents relative to Loudoun residents.

    Warrenton is no farther from many jobs than Leesburg, but Loudoun has created more jobs within reach of Leesburg.

  18. Low tax advocates (presumably a pseudonym for conservatives)

    =================================

    Not at all. Conservationists are generally liberals who care little for other people's property rights, or at least they follow liberal leanings in that regard. they believe the general good of the county is improved by limiting growth.

    I'm not arguing that they are wrong, the county may be better off, but they are not calculating the costs and savings correctly.

    They use the lower tax argument as a reason to support conservation, without pointing out the true costs.

  19. The best way to keep taxes low is to keep people employed …

    ================================
    Are we talking income tax or real estate?

    Around here real estate taxes are low because the values are low, the rates are not so different from other jurisdictions. The values are low because there is little hope for improvements and much of the land is zoned agricultural, in order to collect taxes and provide no services.
    this in spite of there being no economic argument in favor of agricultural zoning on valuable land.

  20. If you choose to live (unemployed) in a place where there are too few jobs you have essentially elected early retirement.

    ===================================

    Agreed, thats why I no longer live on Martha's Vineyard. could have made some kind of living there, but not much.

  21. my friends in Germany are successful businessmen and pay a lot of taxes.

    ==================================

    But fiscal conservatives will tell you thats not possible. Taxes kill jobs.

    And I believe unemployment in Germany has been aroung 9.5 percent for a very long time.

    Are not your friends in germany an example of the 54% you mentioned?

  22. I do not believe you can eliminate the mortgage interest deduction. Politically it won't fly and it will create a huge disparity between landlords and homeowners.

    We will all turn into renters and rent from each other. this is a smoke and mirrors savings unless you eliminate all interest payments as deductions for all businesses.

    That would put all businesses on a cash basis only for growth, which is a surefire way to kill growth.

    That said, the mortgage interest deduction is of no use unless you itemize, so low income owners don;t get it anyway. It benefits wealthy owners, and reducing it is the same as letting the bush tax cuts on the wealthy expire. Conservatives will fight this one.

  23. Hydra will say that the large farms get virtually all the subsidies. Fine. That should make it all the easier to end those subsidies.

    ================================

    Well fine, but then you need to allow some way for farmers to exit the farming business, and that means you have to change their zoning.

  24. It's "earning" for someone besides yourself, eh?

    Oh.. and it's pretty much not taxed either…

    =================================

    That goes in the external costs part of my equation.

    we need to minimize TC where TC = PC + EC + GC.

    Focusing on one term or the other is a mistake that costs us all money and resources.

  25. Anonymous Avatar

    Based on these comments it seems there are not too many people concerned about "right wing" AG Cuccinelli going after the poor UVA climate "scientists".

  26. James A. Bacon Avatar
    James A. Bacon

    Ray said: "I do not believe you can eliminate the mortgage interest deduction. Politically it won't fly and it will create a huge disparity between landlords and homeowners.

    We will all turn into renters and rent from each other."

    Yet… Canada permits no mortgage interest deductions and Canadians somehow have a higher rate of home ownership than the U.S.

    How do you explain that?

  27. James A. Bacon Avatar
    James A. Bacon

    Larry said, "I'm pretty surprised that neither Bacon nor Groveton have proffered their views on the Deficit Commission recommendations."

    Larry, I wrote a column for the Washington Times, which I will republish here as soon as they publish it. They've been sitting on it for a couple of days.

    Bottom line: I think Bowles and Simpson did as good a job as could be done, although I don't agree with everything in the proposal. We'll find out real soon whether the Democrats and/or Republicans are serious about deficit reduction.

  28. re: balancing the budget

    It's a very credible effort – provocative but a start…

    from this point on – if someone disagrees with one – that will be fine – as long as they provide an equivalent value substitution.

    We already know the tax&spend reaction – Pelosi – "unacceptable"….

    but the Conservatives are the ones who have surprised me here.

    they are strangely quiet.. and not openly supportive and that really bothers me after listening to their lectures over the past 18 months about living beyond our means and not giving our kids "crushing" debt, etc.

    that's why I wanted to hear from you and Groveton on this.

  29. For one thing the age at which you are most likely to own a home in canda is when you are sixty five.

    Apparently the higher down payments and lack of deductions means you have to wait a lot longer to begin to enjoy the gains that come from home ownership.

    The ownership rates for older folks is up because fewer are retiring away from Canada.

    I imagine canadian homes are generally smaller because of the heating requiremnts, which may make thme more affordable.

    However it is hard to reconcile a high ownership rate with the age of ownership. People aged 20 to 24 live with their parents longer.

  30. Canadian affordability index.

    The detached bungalow benchmark measure rose by 1.9 of a percentage point to 42.9 per cent, the standard townhouse inched up by 1.1 of a percentage point to 34.1 per cent, the standard condominium climbed by 1.1 of a percentage point up to 29.3 per cent and the standard two-storey home experienced the largest increase, climbing 2.1 percentage points to 48.9 per cent of pretax income.

  31. Virginia's Tax Collections Improve 3.7% in October

    "Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell announced Friday that October revenue collections increased by 3.7 percent over the prior year. This is the seventh month out of the last eight in which state revenue collections exceeded the previous year’s amount. The revenue increase was primarily driven by individual withholding (+4 percent) and sales tax (+6.5 percent) collections."

    McDonnell notes, “We have now seen seven of the last eight months feature increases in revenue collections, and this has occurred in tandem with a slight decrease in our unemployment rate. Clearly, these are signs of a modest turnaround in Virginia’s economy."

  32. Anonymous Avatar

    Could someone move the comments by Larry, Groveton and Bacon to a new heading?

    They have some very useful observations and are unrelated to this original post.

    It would also get rid of the Geographic Illiteracy and Municipalism tainted comments.

  33. re: home mortgage – you need to read the report.

    They are allowing mortgages but capping them on a primary residence on the primary mortgage.

    " Limit mortgage deduction to exclude 2ndresidences, home equity loans, and mortgages over $500,000"

  34. Hydra:

    German unemployment is at 7.5%. However, I don't know that the measurement approaches in the US and Germany are the same.

    More importantly, German unemployment is at an 18 year low – measured with what I assume is a consistent method.

    Why is Germany doing so well while America does so poorly?

    Maybe because Angela Merkel was born in East Germany and wanted to emulate the United States while Barack Obama was born in the United States and wants to emulate East Germany?

    Why hasn't all the manufacturing in very expensive Germany been outsourced to other countries? Germany remains a manufacturing powerhouse. Germany is a major exporter.

    By the American economic theory espoused by Republicans and Democrats … Germany is impossible.

  35. Indeed: " Germany has Europe's oldest universal health care system, with origins dating back to Otto von Bismarck's Social legislation, which included the Health Insurance Bill of 1883, Accident Insurance Bill of 1884, and Old Age and Disability Insurance Bill of 1889. As mandatory health insurance, these bills originally applied only to low-income workers and certain government employees; their coverage, and that of subsequent legislation gradually expanded to cover virtually the entire population.[2]

    Currently 85% of the population is covered by a basic health insurance plan provided by statute, which provides a standard level of coverage. The remainder opt for private health insurance, which frequently offers additional benefits. According to the World Health Organization, Germany's health care system was 77% government-funded and 23% privately funded as of 2004."

    Germany's manufacturing also has some serious trade unions ….lower health care costs and a longer life-expectancy

    but don't let those facts getin the way of the anti-"socialist" ideology in the U.S.

  36. Anonymous is right. This thread is a little disjointed. However, his gratuitous insults have no place here, either.

  37. Germany also has a 67% rental rate.

Leave a Reply


ADVERTISEMENT