Teams
Forum List
Toggle sidebar

Harkin Institute

CycloneErik said:
His professional and personal papers from time in Congress. Essentially, like the Presidential libraries, but for a career member of the House and Senate.

The idea was that the Institute would perform some sort of public policy research. What that meant was pretty vague. The idea of housing the papers was that it would attract scholars doing research into policy measures during Harkin's congressional time.
Click to expand...

When you consider some of the landmark legislation that Harkin was responsible for - Americans with Disabilties Act for example - this is a very big deal for Iowa State. Harkin has been huge in the area of education for decades.
 
Trice said:
The center wouldn't have existed without the sitting senator and the ability to raise funds in his name. Can you articulate why, exactly, it would be such a bad idea to name this center after him while he's still in office?
Click to expand...

Why? Because you could end up getting "research" being conducted using Iowa State's good name to support some paid for position.

Look, I get it that the existing institutes on campus are funded by corporations. And thus, they are subject to research that could serve an agenda. But, they are already there, established, and bringing in $$$ that the academics love. Leath was very much right in his demand that the Harkin Institute coordinate with other entities on campus. That is the SAME demand that is in existence for all other Institutes already in operation! Leath is responsible for protecting the good name of Iowa State University.

But, Tom and Ruth Harkin are first and foremost about themselves. Always have been. I did some work for him back when he ran for POTUS in the late 80s. That experience soured me on EVER thinking a good thought about Tom Harkin. He values his name and his legacy above Iowa State. I say let his "papers" go be studied by a bunch of kids at the Drake library.
 
  • Like
Reactions: aauummm
uthaman said:
Why? Because you could end up getting "research" being conducted using Iowa State's good name to support some paid for position.

Look, I get it that the existing institutes on campus are funded by corporations. And thus, they are subject to research that could serve an agenda. But, they are already there, established, and bringing in $$$ that the academics love. Leath was very much right in his demand that the Harkin Institute coordinate with other entities on campus. That is the SAME demand that is in existence for all other Institutes already in operation! Leath is responsible for protecting the good name of Iowa State University.

But, Tom and Ruth Harkin are first and foremost about themselves. Always have been. I did some work for him back when he ran for POTUS in the late 80s. That experience soured me on EVER thinking a good thought about Tom Harkin. He values his name and his legacy above Iowa State. I say let his "papers" go be studied by a bunch of kids at the Drake library.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but this seems like a rather dubious claim given that he didn't run for president until the 1992 election.
 
uthaman said:
Why? Because you could end up getting "research" being conducted using Iowa State's good name to support some paid for position.

Look, I get it that the existing institutes on campus are funded by corporations. And thus, they are subject to research that could serve an agenda. But, they are already there, established, and bringing in $$$ that the academics love. Leath was very much right in his demand that the Harkin Institute coordinate with other entities on campus. That is the SAME demand that is in existence for all other Institutes already in operation! Leath is responsible for protecting the good name of Iowa State University.

But, Tom and Ruth Harkin are first and foremost about themselves. Always have been. I did some work for him back when he ran for POTUS in the late 80s. That experience soured me on EVER thinking a good thought about Tom Harkin. He values his name and his legacy above Iowa State. I say let his "papers" go be studied by a bunch of kids at the Drake library.
Click to expand...

So sham research that advances the interests of major corporations is okay, but sham research that advances the interest of a politician you don't like is not? That's essentially what you're arguing here.
 
Why does Iowa State (a great research university) want to allow them to do "research" to serve their agenda and not work with the other people on campus? Research at a public university should not be attached to a public official that is still in office.
 
Last edited:
DistrictCyclone said:
I'm sorry, but this seems like a rather dubious claim given that he didn't run for president until the 1992 election.
Click to expand...

Was it 1992? Damn, the years are blurring together. Happens when you get to be my age. That is right because he was running against Bill Clinton. Point still stands. The man is a jackwagon.
 
Ignoring the silly "should it bear his name" debate, Iowa State (and the State of Iowa) could benefit from having an established public policy school. Nobody else has one in the state, and there are few in the Midwest overall. Iowa State has an excellent economics department, and sociology and political science are pretty big, so I imagine they'd be able to find some quality faculty members to sit in such a school.
 
Trice said:
So sham research that advances the interests of major corporations is okay, but sham research that advances the interest of a politician you don't like is not? That's essentially what you're arguing here.
Click to expand...

Welcome to today's politics!
 
Pille1895 said:
You got it exactly right! Why does Iowa State a great research university want to allow them to do "research" to serve their agenda and not work with the other people on campus. Research at a public university should not be attached to a public official that is still in office.
Click to expand...

Right! We must protect the purity of the university and not allow it to be soiled by outside interests!

Oh wait. Farm Bureau and Bruce Rastetter happened.
 
Trice said:
Right! We must protect the purity of the university and not allow it to be soiled by outside interests!

Oh wait. Farm Bureau and Bruce Rastetter happened.
Click to expand...

Any chance in your mind Tom Harkin is in the wrong here? Nope? Didn't think so. Guess we will just have to disagree on this one... Senate only works two days this week, so I am sure Harkin is back in Iowa dealing personally with an issue like this that is SO important to him. Or, is he down at his home in the Bahamas?
 
Trice said:
Right! We must protect the purity of the university and not allow it to be soiled by outside interests!

Oh wait. Farm Bureau and Bruce Rastetter happened.
Click to expand...

If they refuse to collaborate with the rest of the university then you are correct. At this point I have no reason to believe that is true.
 
chuckd4735 said:
Well, I have no factual information on the subject, I was just making an assumption.
Click to expand...

It's a safe assumption to make nowadays, for sure, but the era of "perpetual campaigning" is a pretty recent phenomenon. Even in 2004, most of the challengers to Bush didn't announce their runs until within a year before the first primary, and had only formed exploratory committees a few months earlier. Unfortunately, I think the constant campaigning garbage is here to stay for a while.

I know a few people pretty well who have worked with Harkin for years, and from what we've talked about, it sounds like even Harkin knew his '92 run was a long-shot. The strategy was basically to win Iowa (first in the nation caucus), which would capture all of the media attention, and then use it as a springboard to do well in other states. It pretty much backfired when a lot of other candidates pulled out of campaigning in Iowa and conceded it to Harkin as a "native son", so the media didn't even give it much coverage.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
uthaman said:
Any chance in your mind Tom Harkin is in the wrong here? Nope? Didn't think so. Guess we will just have to disagree on this one... Senate only works two days this week, so I am sure Harkin is back in Iowa dealing personally with an issue like this that is SO important to him. Or, is he down at his home in the Bahamas?
Click to expand...

Please enlighten me with your unbiased thinking.

I have no idea if Tom Harkin is in the wrong, and that wasn't the crux of my question. I asked why it's such a bad thing to have an institute like this named after a sitting senator. And I haven't gotten one response that stands up to even the slightest logical challenge. So I guess my original hunch, that the opposition to this is not because it's a sitting senator but because it's a Democrat, is probably on the mark.
 
This whole process is mind numbing. Politics aside( full disclosure I love Harkin) he is one of the most well known and established alumnus of our university. To not have his papers and policy center here is a disgrace. The university administration dropped the ball big time on this one and should be ashamed of themselves.
 
DistrictCyclone said:
It's a safe assumption to make nowadays, for sure, but the era of "perpetual campaigning" is a pretty recent phenomenon. Even in 2004, most of the challengers to Bush didn't announce their runs until within a year before the first primary, and had only formed exploratory committees a few months earlier. Unfortunately, I think the constant campaigning garbage is here to stay for a while.

I know a few people pretty well who have worked with Harkin for years, and from what we've talked about, it sounds like even Harkin knew his '92 run was a long-shot. The strategy was basically to win Iowa (first in the nation caucus), which would capture all of the media attention, and then use it as a springboard to do well in other states. It pretty much backfired when a lot of other candidates pulled out of campaigning in Iowa and conceded it to Harkin as a "native son", so the media didn't even give it much coverage.
Click to expand...

So, exactly what day did Harkin start running for the 1992 election? Just curious.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Help Support Us

Become a patron
Top Bottom
Back