Practically everyone connected with higher education can remember those summer and fall days in 1987 as some of the most painful days. The funding status of the system followed almost as rocky a course as the stock market did in the fall.

With the state legislature’s refusal to bite on Gov. Thompson’s tax increase proposal, the stage was set for everybody, not just higher education, to find alternative funding. NIU lost $3.3 million because of Thompson’s budget cuts. It was regained by charging students $150 this semester, but NIU still was unable to give faculty any more dough for fiscal year 1988.

It is doubtful anyone wants to see a repeat performance. The Illinois Board of Higher Education, in a rare example of willingly splurging on NIU, granted NIU President John LaTourette and Board of Regents Chancellor Roderick Groves’ wish for increased funding with a proposed 12.6 percent increase in NIU’s budget for FY 1989.

The big question, whether NIU will receive anywhere near what it needs, will be answered by the legislature. Very simply, if enough constituents can convince people like John Countryman and Patrick Welch that they want a larger part of their salary sent to Springfield, NIU might have a chance.

This task, which seems attainable with hard work, has one large hurdle to leap, along with other smaller ones. The entire House of Representatives and one-third of the Senate is up for re-election. While some of these people, Countryman included so far, either have no one opposing them or have decided not to run again, the others have to steer themselves carefully through delicate situations. A tax boost is by far one of the most fragile.

Certainly no legislator is going into the spring session openly favoring a tax increase unless those who elected him or her have expressed such a desire. Otherwise, an onslaught of pleas from the public will be needed to convince them. Legislators are not fools; they know tax increases can come back to haunt them.

Unless these legislators become convinced, a scenario similar to 1987’s is not hard to envision. Even if the tax increase is passed, the governor and the legislature will still have their chance to slice it however they want in the normal budgeting process. With that power in their hands, the burden of proof for the need for funds is on the defendant in this case—that is, everyone connected with higher education.

In October, almost all of higher education joined in a united front with the Day of Action. While the cause was well-supported, it obviously was only the beginning. After all, that movement came when higher education funding for FY ‘88 was all but a dead issue.

It is good to know Day of Action II is in the works and will occur this spring. But higher ed. types cannot wait for that day in April. An all-out assault is in order, with students and their parents writing letters to, calling and seeing in person those legislators who have the ability to make future days for higher education much brighter than those in 1987. Registering to vote—and then voting—can only help.

But it doesn’t stop with the students. The Regents need to become more involved in the lobbying procedure than they were. Simply passing resolutions and letting student Regent Nick Valadez make a dramatic last-minute pitch will not do. The IBHE also needs to make its presence known more—and not just for the University of Illinois.

If anyone thinks 1987 cannot happen again, think twice. As far as education is concerned, the state legislature’s most important concern is elementary and secondary education. At the legislative veto session in November, the legislature approved $22 million in supplementary funds for elementary and secondary ed., but none for higher ed.

Higher ed. has a lot of work to do, and it cannot count on the legislature’s mercy. The burden of proof is on higher ed.