Suit Shows Glide Path To Top Schools for Rich

"A lawsuit alleging universities colluded to determine students' financial-aid packages provides a glimpse into the ways top schools assess children of privilege differently from the rest of the applicant pool.

At Georgetown University, a former president selected students for a special admission list by consulting their parents' donation history, not their transcript, according to the suit. At Massachusetts Institute of Technology, a board member got the school to admit two applicants who were children of a wealthy former business colleague, the suit alleges. And at Notre Dame, an enrollment official in charge of a special applicant list wrote to others, "Sure hope the wealthy next year raise a few more smart kids!", according to the suit.

The motion, filed Tuesday in Illinois federal court, is the latest salvo in a lawsuit that began in January 2022. The plaintiffs, former students, initially accused more than a dozen elite universities with price fixing. Twelve schools have since settled.

The motion on Tuesday seeks class-action status for the case against the remaining five schools: MIT, Notre Dame, University of Pennsylvania, Georgetown and Cornell University.

For families embroiled in the college application process and facing ever steeper odds to win entry to elite schools, the records feed suspicions that colleges have different standards for children of means.

At Notre Dame, the university's Institutional Risk and Compliance Committee said the admission of so many children of major donors represented a major risk to the institution's brand should it become public, according to the motion. In 2020, the school admitted 86 applicants who were connected to large donors, or about 4% of the incoming class. Within that group, 76% of those donor admissions needed special consideration to get in, the motion said.

Speaking about the class of 2016, Donald Bishop, then the associate vice president for undergraduate enrollment, noted a decline of 30 top academic students at the same time the donor list was used.

"We allowed their high gifting or potential gifting to influence our choices more this year than last year," Bishop said in a 2012 email provided in the lawsuit.

Spokespeople for Georgetown, Notre Dame and MIT said the schools plan to fight the suit in court, and said that their students all earned their places. A Notre Dame spokesman said the school is confident "every student admitted to Notre Dame is fully qualified and ready to succeed."

It is a precarious time for elite universities, which have become the targets of growing public frustration. President-elect Donald Trump has threatened to investigate internal university operations and tax the endowments of elite schools.

Some of the anger directed at the nation's most prestigious schools comes from perceived hypocrisy.

Elite universities often present themselves as meritocracies that admit the best and brightest. The motion filed Tuesday, which draws from years of speeches at exclusive gatherings, depositions and internal university reports, shows officials bowing to financial pressures to admit wealthy students over potentially more qualified candidates.

Discovery in a separate court case about race-based preferences in college admissions revealed Harvard University had a "Z list," a route through which weaker, but wealthy or connected, applicants could gain admission.

In the last few years several schools, including Amherst College, have gotten rid of legacy admission. Additionally several states, including California, have banned the practice.

Tuesday's filing seeks class-action certification and asks for $685 million in damages. If awarded, that figure would triple to more than $2 billion under U.S. antitrust laws. Ten schools including Dartmouth College, Northwestern University and Rice University have settled for a total of $284 million, and two more have settled for amounts that haven't been disclosed.

The lawsuit also includes testimony from Sara Harberson, Penn's associate dean of admission from 1999 to 2008, who was deposed for the case in October 2023. She said that the school had a "bona fide special interest" tag for students from families who were big donors or knew someone on the board of trustees.

Those students were assured of admission.

If the school was over-enrolled, they were protected, regardless of their academic record. "You had absolutely no power as an admissions officer," Harberson said in her deposition.

A spokesman for Penn said it sees no merit in the lawsuit.

"The actual evidence in the case makes clear that Penn does not favor in admissions students whose families have made or pledged donations to Penn, whatever the amount," said the spokesman.

At Georgetown, a former president selected students for an annual president's list after reviewing information about the parents' donation history and capacity, but without reviewing the applicant's transcript, teacher recommendations, or personal essays. Atop the list he often wrote "Please Admit," according to the motion." [1]

 The same corrupt system was introduced in Lithuania during the reigns of conservatives and liberals. Only Lithuania is so small, and there are so many corrupt actors, that there are no capable people left who are able to work.

1. Suit Shows Glide Path To Top Schools for Rich. Belkin, Douglas.  Wall Street Journal, Eastern edition; New York, N.Y.. 18 Dec 2024: A.1.

 

Už Vokietijos politinių neramumų – stagnuojanti ekonomika

  „Viena iš Europos stiprybių praranda savo konkurencinį pranašumą, o politinė klasė negali susitarti, kodėl – ar ką su tuo daryti.

 

 Jei ieškote greito paaiškinimo, kodėl pirmadienį išsiskyrė kanclerio Olafo Scholzo vyriausybė Vokietijoje, apsvarstykite tai.

 

 Per pastaruosius penkerius metus dėl pandemijos nuosmukio ir jos infliacijos padarinių Amerikos ekonomika išaugo 12 proc. Vokietijos ekonomika visiškai neaugo.

 

 Vokietijos ekonomikos variklis, trečias pagal dydį pasaulyje, sustojo, o jos politinė klasė negali susitarti, kodėl – ar ką su tuo daryti.

 

 Kaip ir daugelis kitų Vakarų šalių popandemijos eroje, Vokietiją kamuoja ekonominis negalavimas, kuris sukelia populistinius maištus prie balsadėžių ir įgalina kraštutinių kairiųjų ir kraštutinių dešiniųjų politines partijas. Tačiau ne visi negalavimai yra vienodi.

 

 Amerikietiška versija, padėjusi Donaldui J. Trumpui laimėti dar vieną kadenciją lapkritį, daugiausia buvo susijusi su skausmu dėl pandeminių kainų šuolių. Rinkėjai neapdovanojo viceprezidentės Kamala Harris už prezidento Bideno laiku stulbinantį pasaulio ekonomikos augimą. Jie buvo pernelyg pikti dėl maisto prekių ir nuomos kainų.

 

 Vokiečių rinkėjai ir politikai būtų apsidžiaugę, jei jų ekonomika būtų augusi net nedidelę dalį Amerikos augimo. Jų ekonomika per pandemiją susitraukė, atsigavo, tada per pastaruosius dvejus metus sustojo. Šiais metais ji vos išvengė nuosmukio.

 

 Liūdni augimo skaičiai padėjo suerzinti visuomenę apie p. Scholzą ir jo liberalių pažiūrų socialdemokratus. Jie padėjo paskatinti aršų trijų partijų koalicijos, kuriai jis vadovavo nuo 2021 m., iširimą, paruošdami kelią, pirmadienį įvykusiam, nesėkmingam balsavimui dėl pasitikėjimo ir vasarį vyksiantiems pirmalaikiams parlamento rinkimams.

 

 Vokietijos ekonomika nepatiria laisvo kritimo. Tačiau užsitęsęs jos silpnumo laikotarpis jau yra pagrindinis taškas kandidatams, pretenduojantiems vadovauti kitai vyriausybei pavojingu Vokietijai ir Europai momentu.

 

 „Kalbame apie ekonomiką nuosmukį, o ne katastrofą“, – viename interviu sakė Amy Gutmann, buvusi Pensilvanijos universiteto prezidentė, ėjusi Bideno ambasadorės pareigas Vokietijoje nuo 2022 m. iki šių metų.

 

 „Vokietijos ekonomika yra stipriausia Europoje – ji vis dar yra, nepasikeitė – ir aš tikiu, kad taip bus ir ateityje“, – sakė ji, „bet tik tuo atveju, jei Vokietija imsis pokyčių“.

 

 Didžiausios šalies ekonominės problemos yra didelis sunkiosios pramonės nuosmukis, kuris dešimtmečius lėmė jos augimą, ir smukstanti pasaulinė eksportuojamų prekių rinka. Automobilių gamintojai ir kiti sunkieji gamintojai paskelbė apie atleidimus. 

 

Verslo vadovai karčiai skundžiasi aukštomis energijos kainomis, mažinančiomis jų galimybes konkuruoti, ypač su pigiais produktais iš Kinijos.

 

 Vyriausybės bandymai pervesti šalį prie mažesnės emisijos elektros energijos šaltinių ir greitai pakeisti importuojamas gamtines dujas iš Rusijos po invazijos į Ukrainą, toli gražu nėra baigti.

 

 Debatai dėl ekonomikos vyks, per vasarį vyksiančius, pirmalaikius rinkimus, kuriuose p. Scholzo centro kairioji partija kovos su šešiais kitais, kurie visi turi realias galimybes laimėti vietas. Šiuo metu kanclerio rinkimuose vadovauja Friedrichas Merzas, vadovaujantis konservatyviajai Krikščionių demokratų sąjungos partijai.

 

 Pagrindinėse Vokietijos partijose nėra tiesioginio D. Trumpo analogo – nė vienas kandidatas, žadantis padidinti augimą protekcionistinės ekonomikos politikos ir valios jėgos deriniu.

 

 Taigi, ekonominiai debatai, kurie pirmadienį dominavo Vokietijos kampanijos sezono pradžioje, skambėjo ne taip, kaip per paskutinius Amerikos prezidento rinkimus, o labiau, kaip detalūs Baracko Obamos ir Mitto Romney politiniai ginčai 2012 m.

 

 Įstatymų leidėjams ruošiantis balsuoti už vyriausybės paleidimą, p. Scholzas per savo 2020 m. kampaniją atspindėjo B. Obamą ir – dar labiau – Bideną. Jis teigė, kad Vokietija kenčia nuo nuolatinių vyriausybės nepakankamų investicijų į kritinę infrastruktūrą, o tai kėlė grėsmę jos, kaip pasaulinės pramonės lyderės, pozicijai. Tai taikoma jos energijos tiekimui, internetui ir net geležinkeliams.

 

 Jo receptas buvo panašus į pono Bideno. Jis paragino padidinti vyriausybės skolinimąsi, kad būtų remiamos išlaidos esamai infrastruktūrai ir bandymams įsitvirtinti kylančiose pramonės šakose, tokiose kaip dirbtinis intelektas, biotechnologijos ir kvantinė kompiuterija. Jis pažadėjo įmonėms taikyti „Made in Germany“ mokesčių lengvatą.

 

 „Mums reikia didesnio augimo“, – pirmadienį sakė p. Scholzas. Jis sakė, kad, norint jį gauti, „atėjo laikas stipriai ir ryžtingai investuoti Vokietijoje“.

 

 P. Scholzas piktinosi Vokietijoje įsisenėjusiais biudžeto suvaržymais ir paragino pakeisti konstitucinę vyriausybės skolinimosi ribą, kad būtų remiamos tikslingesnės išlaidos. Vis dėlto per trejus darbo metus jam nepavyko paskatinti augimo, o apklausos rodo, kad jis, greičiausiai, nepasieks dar vienos galimybės atlikti ekonominį kapitalinį remontą.

 

 Pirmaujantis kandidatas Merzas pirmadienį šaipėsi iš p. Scholzo, kaltindamas jį palikus Vokietiją „vienoje didžiausių ekonominių krizių pokario istorijoje“.

 

P. Merzo atnaujinimo planai yra skirti priversti vokiečius dirbti ilgesnes valandas, įskaitant vyriausybės išmokų panaikinimą beveik dviem milijonams žmonių, kurie, pasak p. Merzo, gali dirbti, bet nedirba. „Turime suteikti jiems drąsos, padrąsinimo ir paskatų grįžti į darbo rinką“, – sakė jis.

 

 Jis taip pat pažadėjo sumažinti kai kuriuos mokesčius, įskaitant korporacijas. Taip pat ir verslui palankūs Laisvieji demokratai, kurie buvo p. Scholzo koalicijos nariai iki pasitraukimo lapkritį. Christianas Lindneris, Laisvųjų demokratų lyderis, rėmėsi D. Trumpo kampanijos pažadais, ragindamas sumažinti mokesčius, kad padėtų Vokietijos įmonėms.

 

 „Amerikos vyriausybė svarsto galimybę sumažinti pelno mokesčius iki 15 procentų, o mes esame dvigubai brangesni – 30 procentų“, – sakė jis. „Kadangi nesame dvigubai geresni už JAV, negalime būti daugiau, nei dvigubai, brangesni.

 

 Alice Weidel, kandidatė į kraštutinių dešiniųjų partijos „Alternatyva Vokietijai“ arba AfD, kuri per pastaruosius valstijos rinkimus sustiprėjo, kanclerė, pirmadienį apgailestavo dėl kenčiančio Vokietijos verslo klimato.

 

 M. Weidel, kuri prieš eidama į politiką dirbo Ernst & Young, sakė, kad p. Scholzo vyriausybė paliko „automobilių pramonę dėl milžiniškų blogų investicijų į laisvą kritimą; mechanikos inžinerija mažėja; chemijos pramonė bėga nuo sprogstančių energijos kainų“.

 

 Ji sulaukė ekonomikos ministro ir žaliųjų lyderio Roberto Habecko priekaištų, kuris pirmadienio debatuose teigė, kad AfD grasinimai deportuoti imigrantus išeikvotų Vokietijos darbo jėgą. AfD, anot jo, „kelia didžiausią grėsmę Vokietijos ekonomikai, konkurencingumui ir augimui. Taip, savo rasizmu įvesite šalį į sunkią ekonominę krizę.

 

 Buvo stiprūs atgarsiai, kalbant apie pirmyn ir atgal tarp p. Bideno ir p. Harris bei D. Trumpo, kurie agitavo už reguliavimo panaikinimą, imigrantų deportaciją ir pelno mokesčio lengvatas.

 

 D. Trumpas taip pat pažadėjo įvairiausius individualius mokesčių mažinimus ir netgi žadėjo visiškai panaikinti pajamų mokesčius. Niekas Vokietijoje taip toli neįbrido į ekonominį populizmą, bet ėmėsi žingsnių jo link.

 

 AfD pažadėjo sumažinti mokesčius ir subsidijas bei panaikinti Vokietijos žaliosios energijos politiką, siekdama sumažinti naštą darbuotojams. 

 

P. Scholzas pirmadienį ragino mažinti mokesčius bakalėjos prekėms ir didinti minimalų atlyginimą. 

 

O p. Merzas nori sumažinti pajamų mokesčius mažas ir vidutines pajamas gaunantiems darbuotojams.

 

 Jie tarsi pasimokė iš D. Trumpo nugalėtų oponentų demokratų: augimas būtinas. Tačiau ekonomiškai, o ypač politiškai, to retai užtenka.“ [1]

 

1. Behind Germany’s Political Turmoil, a Stagnating Economy: News Analysis. Tankersley, Jim.  New York Times (Online) New York Times Company. Dec 17, 2024.

Behind Germany’s Political Turmoil, a Stagnating Economy

 

"One of Europe’s powerhouses is losing its competitive edge, and the political class can’t agree on why — or what to do about it.

If you are looking for a quick explanation for why Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s government in Germany dissolved on Monday, consider this.

Over the past five years, through pandemic recession and its inflationary aftermath, the American economy has grown 12 percent in real terms. The German economy has not grown at all.

Germany’s economic engine, the world’s third-largest, has stalled, and its political class cannot agree on why — or what to do about it.

Like so many other Western nations in the post-pandemic era, Germany is afflicted with economic malaise, the sort that gives rise to populist revolts at the ballot box and empowers political parties on the far left and the far right. But not all malaise is the same.

The American version that helped Donald J. Trump win another term in November was largely about the lingering pain of pandemic price spikes. Voters did not reward Vice President Kamala Harris for the world-beating economic growth on President Biden’s watch. They were too angry about the cost of groceries and rent.

German voters, and politicians, would have been delighted if their economy had grown even at a small fraction of the American rate. Their economy shrank in the pandemic, rebounded, then stagnated over the last two years. It narrowly avoided recession this year.

Dismal growth numbers helped to sour the public on Mr. Scholz and his liberal-leaning Social Democrats. They helped to drive the acrimonious breakup of the three-party coalition he had led since 2021, paving the way for the failed confidence vote on Monday and snap parliamentary elections in February.

The German economy is not in free fall. But its prolonged period of weakness is already the focal point for the candidates vying to lead the next government at a perilous moment for Germany and for Europe.

“We’re talking about an economy in downturn, not in disaster,” Amy Gutmann, a former University of Pennsylvania president who served as Mr. Biden’s ambassador to Germany from 2022 until this year, said in an interview.

“Germany is the strongest economy in Europe — it still is, that has not changed — and I believe it will be into the future,” she said, “but only if Germany makes changes.”

The country’s biggest economic problems include a broad decline in the heavy industries that have driven its growth for decades and a sagging global market for its exported goods. Automakers and other heavy manufacturers have announced layoffs. Business leaders complain bitterly about high energy prices throttling their ability to compete, particularly with low-cost products from China.

The government’s attempts to shift the country to lower-emission sources of electricity, and to rapidly replace imported natural gas from Russia after the invasion of Ukraine, are nowhere near complete.

The debate over the economy will play out in February’s snap elections, in which Mr. Scholz’s center-left party will battle six others that all have realistic chances of winning seats. The man currently leading the race to be chancellor is Friedrich Merz, who heads the conservative Christian Democratic Union party.

There is no direct analogue to Mr. Trump in Germany’s mainstream parties — no candidate promising to supercharge growth through a combination of protectionist economic policies and sheer force of will.

So the economic debate that dominated the opening salvos of Germany’s campaign season on Monday sounded less like those during the most recent American presidential election and more like the detailed policy disputes between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney in 2012.

As lawmakers prepared to vote to dissolve the government, Mr. Scholz mirrored Mr. Obama and — to an even greater extent — Mr. Biden during his 2020 campaign. He argued that Germany suffered from chronic government underinvestment in critical infrastructure, which threatened its position as a global industrial leader. That applies to its energy supply, its internet, even its railways.

His prescription was similar to Mr. Biden’s. He called for an increase in government borrowing to support spending on both existing infrastructure and attempts to gain footholds in emerging industries like artificial intelligence, biotechnology and quantum computing. He pledged a “Made in Germany” tax incentive for companies.

“We need more growth,” Mr. Scholz said on Monday. To get it, he said, “it is high time to invest powerfully and decisively in Germany.”

Mr. Scholz has chafed at Germany’s ingrained budgetary constraints and has called for changes to a constitutional limit on government borrowing to support more targeted spending. Still, he failed to spur growth during his three years in office, and polls suggest he is unlikely to win another chance to implement economic overhauls.

The front-runner, Mr. Merz, scoffed at Mr. Scholz on Monday, accusing him of leaving Germany in “one of the biggest economic crises in postwar history.”

Mr. Merz’s renewal plans center on pushing Germans to work longer hours, including by rolling back government benefits for nearly two million people who Mr. Merz said were capable of working but not employed. “We must give them the courage, encouragement and incentive to return to the labor market,” he said.

He has also promised to cut some taxes, including for corporations. So have the pro-business Free Democrats, who were members of Mr. Scholz’s coalition until they pulled out in November. Christian Lindner, leader of the Free Democrats, invoked Mr. Trump’s campaign pledges in calling for tax cuts to help German companies.

“The American government is considering lowering corporate taxes to 15 percent, while we are twice as expensive at 30 percent,” he said. “Since we are not twice as good as the U.S., we cannot be more than twice as expensive.”

Alice Weidel, the chancellor candidate for the far-right Alternative for Germany, or AfD, which has grown more powerful in recent state elections, lamented Germany’s suffering business climate on Monday.

Ms. Weidel, who worked at Ernst & Young before going into politics, said that Mr. Scholz’s government had left “the automotive industry, thanks to gigantic bad investments, in free fall; mechanical engineering in decline; the chemical industry fleeing from exploding energy costs.”

She drew a rebuke from Robert Habeck, the economy minister and leader of the Greens, who said in the Monday debate that the AfD’s threats to deport immigrants would drain Germany’s work force. The AfD, he said, “poses the greatest threat to the economy in Germany, to competitiveness and to growth. Yes, with your racism, you will lead the country into a severe economic crisis.”

There were strong echoes of the back-and-forth between Mr. Biden and Ms. Harris and Mr. Trump, who campaigned on deregulation, immigrant deportation and corporate tax breaks.

Mr. Trump also promised a wide variety of individual tax cuts and even floated eliminating income taxes entirely. No one in Germany has waded that far into economic populism, but they have taken steps toward it.

The AfD has promised to cut taxes and subsidies and to repeal Germany’s green-energy policies in a bid to reduce burdens on workers. Mr. Scholz called on Monday for reducing taxes on groceries and for raising the minimum wage. And Mr. Merz wants to reduce income taxes for low- and middle-income workers.

It is as if they learned a lesson from Mr. Trump’s defeated Democratic opponents: Growth is necessary. But economically, and especially politically, it is rarely enough." [1]

1. Behind Germany’s Political Turmoil, a Stagnating Economy: News Analysis. Tankersley, Jim.  New York Times (Online) New York Times Company. Dec 17, 2024.