The Milwaukee Post

I have three suggestions for the new University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee chancel- lor now that UWM's Michael Lovell has jumped ship for Marquette University. These are inspired choices that would shake up the paradigm. It's time to think outside the box. Choice No. 1: Former Ambassador Mark Green. This is not as much of a stretch as it sounds; Green was a finalist for the UW System top position just a couple of months ago. A for- mer congressman with a law degree, he's also a former ambassador and now runs a nonparti- san group that champions democracy around the globe. Imagine how he'd raise the profile of Milwaukee's public university. I have found him well-spoken and well-meaning. Choice No. 2: Former Gov. Tommy Thompson. If Lee Dreyfus could go from chan- cellor to governor, why couldn't Tommy go from governor to chancellor? He's 72, but Tommy strikes me as the type of person who is probably still itching to run something. Thompson was a booster of Wisconsin. Imagine how he'd raise the profile of UWM. Imagine the fundraising potential he'd create, especially in the four-county area, where some people have the perception of all public uni- versities in Wisconsin as being liberal strong- holds they don't want to waste money on. Thompson is obviously a former Cabinet secre- tary, and he, too, holds a terminal degree – a law degree. Choice No. 3 would be a raid back at Marquette University. How about former state Supreme Court Justice Janine Geske? She was even county executive for a short stint, and she is currently a distinguished professor of law at Marquette, where she runs a restorative justice institute. She was a professor before she became a judge. It strikes me that all three enjoy challenges, and they like running things and making a dif- ference. What's a bigger challenge than run- ning a university like UW-Milwaukee in a time of tight budgets and declining enrollment? UWM is so critically important to the state all three love – it's a driver of the city's, and thus, the state's economic engine because so many of its graduates stay in the local economy (I received both of my degrees at UWM and have taught there full time in the journalism department since 2004). I'd stack our students against anybody's. UWM is a place where some students land who have the talents but not the finances or family support to go elsewhere or maybe they were off fighting wars (UWM has the highest number of veterans in the UW System). But the fact they've struggled gives many of our students the X factor so needed to succeed: motivation. The university is facing challenges, in enrollment and retention. It's a university with potential. It's not UW-Madison coasting on its flagship status in a bubble; it's a university on the rise. After all, the new Microsoft CEO is a UWM alum. Each of these choices would shake up the boat, and instantly make people look at UWM in a light. People would say, Lovell who? People would want to send their kids there. It would generate excitement. I liked Lovell. He was a high-profile, high-energy chancellor, and a very fair man. I believe that religious faith is an intensely personal experience, and he cites his devout Catholicism as the driving force in his move. He wanted to integrate his faith with his professional career; at a secular public uni- versity, one cannot. I don't begrudge him this choice. However, Lovell's leaving creates some chaos at UWM right as the university was gain- ing momentum and facing critical issues (such as the budget struggles and new facilities expansions). Furthermore, he's but the latest in a revolv- ing door of modern chancellors, each of whom has come for a couple years before skipping town for higher-profile environs. The current chancellor selection process is not working. The new chancellor should be someone with strong Wisconsin roots (like the three I mentioned). It should be someone with instant profile. And it should be a person at the tail end, not the middle, of their career, so they won't feel the need to use UWM to skip upward to some other place (Geske and Thompson fit this more than Green does, admittedly). The new chancellor should be a person will- ing to devote a decade to the place. Consistency of leadership and vision is essential to UWM's success. I would enjoy the prospect of a moder- ate Republican running UWM; it would send a strong message that our public universities are inclusive of all ranges of political thought. It would help build bridges back with the Legislature and the governor. I think it would broaden UWM's fundraising base. The new chancellor should be highly educated (all three of my choices have law degrees). Please, don't hire some stuffy professor no one's heard of or some dazzling superstar in waiting from another state. We need people to embrace our cause not as a résumé builder. None of these three is going to beg for the job; UWM would have to court them like Marquette did with Lovell. I'm wishing my university was so bold. (Jessica McBride is a member of the journal- ism faculty at the University of Wisconsin- Milwaukee. Her column runs occasionally in The Post.) 8 • Milwaukee County Post • April 4, 2014 Question of the week Should Wisconsin sign into law the oral chemotherapy bill that would make expensive chemotherapy drugs in pill form more affordable for cancer patients? "I'm saying yes, all expenses and let the insurance cover all that stuff and increase the premiums accordingly. It will make Obamacare extremely expen- sive, and that's what they wanted and so that's what they should get. We have heart disease, we have multiple sclerosis. Subsidize them all." – Noah Borkenhagen Franklin "There are the interests of the drug companies. There are the interests of the insurance companies. But paramount to these should be the interests of chemotherapy patients in need of effective, less expensive and less invasive medicine. In the game of compassion and decency, the bill should be enacted." – Sandy Sue Szanderek Milwaukee This week's question How do you feel about the county referendum passing that would cut supervisors' pay and benefits? Editor's note: When responding to the Question of the Week, please include your full name with spelling, phone number and city where you live. Phone numbers will not be published. Anonymous responses are no longer accepted by the publication. Call 744-6370, Ext. 15 and leave a brief answer. Readers may also send an email with a brief answer to: dbutler@conleynet.com. OPINION McBride Who's next to lead UWM? Three possible candidates for chancellor from outside the box LETTERS TO THE EDITOR Hillary Clinton unqualified for president To the editor: Then-Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton was responsible for the grossly inadequate security of the American Consulate in Libya when it was attacked by terrorists on the anniversary of 9/11. The American ambassador to Libya had warned her in advance that terrorists were train- ing in close proximity to the Consulate and that he feared an imminent terrorist attack. Clinton ignored his warning. Our ambassa- dor had begged Clinton to increase security at our Libyan Consulate. She turned him down. In fact, Clinton decreased security at the Consulate. After Libyan terrorists then slaughtered our brave ambassador and three other American heroes on the anniversary of 9/11, Clinton cow- ardly sent our United Nations ambas- sador, who had nothing to do with the terrible security at our Libyan Consulate, to the Sunday talk shows to mislead the American people and to falsely blame the murderous ter- rorist attack on a video. The facts show that the video had nothing to do with highly trained and well-equipped terrorists using a sophisticated military mortar to cold- bloodedly murder two former Navy SEALs during the attack. Clinton should not now be allowed to skate away from her calculated misleading of the American people about her shocking malfeasance as secretary of state in connection with the predicted and deadly 9/11 terrorist assault on our Libyan Consulate. Clinton is not qualified to be our commander in chief. Jeffrey P. Clark Brookfield

• Cover