<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<title type="html"><![CDATA[Save Alabama PACT Discussion Forum]]></title>
	<link rel="self" href="http://www.savealabamapact.com/forum/feed-atom-forum3.xml"/>
	<updated>2010-07-28T08:03:01Z</updated>
	<generator>PunBB</generator>
	<id>http://www.savealabamapact.com/forum/</id>
		<entry>
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[Wholesale Cheap Jordans,Nikes,Air Max,Air Force 1]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" href="http://www.savealabamapact.com/forum/topic241-wholesale-cheap-jordansnikesair-maxair-force-1-new-posts.html"/>
			<summary type="html"><![CDATA[[url]http://www.voguesneakers.com/[/url] [url=http://www.voguesneakers.com/index.asp]Our Company Wholesale and Retail:[/url]
[url=http://www.voguesneakers.com/product.asp?bigclassid=13]Air Jordan Shoes[/url]
[url=http://www.voguesneakers.com/product.asp?bigclassid=14]Air Jordan Fusions Air Force 1 Shoes[/url]
[url=http://www.voguesneakers.com/product.asp?bigclassid=16]Air Jordan Fusions Other Shoes[/url]
[url=http://www.voguesneakers.com/product.asp?bigclassid=18]Air Jordan Fusions Air Jordan Shoes[/url]
[url=http://www.voguesneakers.com/product.asp?bigclassid=11]Air Max Shoes[/url]
[url=http://www.voguesneakers.com/product.asp?bigclassid=11&smallclassid=581]Air Max 90 Shoes[/url]
[url=http://www.voguesneakers.com/product.asp?bigclassid=11&smallclassid=587]Air Max TN Shoes[/url]
[url=http://www.voguesneakers.com/product.asp?bigclassid=12]Nike Shox Shoes[/url]
[url=http://www.voguesneakers.com/product.asp?bigclassid=12&smallclassid=566]Nike Shox R4 Shoes[/url]
[url=http://www.voguesneakers.com/product.asp?bigclassid=12&smallclassid=570]Nike Shox NZ Shoes[/url]
[url=http://www.voguesneakers.com/product.asp?bigclassid=19]Air Force 1 Shoes[/url]  
[url=http://www.voguesneakers.com/product.asp?bigclassid=20]Nike Dunk Sb Shoes[/url] 
[url=http://www.voguesneakers.com/product.asp?bigclassid=23]Air Yeezy Shoes[/url] 
[url=http://www.voguesneakers.com/product.asp?bigclassid=27]Supra Shoes[/url] 
[url=http://www.voguesneakers.com/product.asp?bigclassid=28]Timberland Shoes[/url] 
[url=http://www.voguesneakers.com/product.asp?bigclassid=31]Gucci Shoes[/url] 
[url=http://www.voguesneakers.com/product.asp?bigclassid=34]Puma Shoes[/url]
[url=http://www.voguesneakers.com/product.asp?bigclassid=36]Prada Shoes[/url] 
[url=http://www.voguesneakers.com/product.asp?bigclassid=37]Adidas Shoes[/url] 
[url=http://www.voguesneakers.com/product.asp?bigclassid=42]MBT Shoes[/url]
[url=http://www.voguesneakers.com/product.asp?bigclassid=48]Kids Shoes[/url]
[url=http://www.voguesneakers.com/product.asp?bigclassid=55]Clothes[/url]
[url=http://www.voguesneakers.com/product.asp?bigclassid=56]T-Shirts[/url]
[url=http://www.voguesneakers.com/product.asp?bigclassid=59]Jeans[/url]
[url=http://www.voguesneakers.com/product.asp?bigclassid=62]NFL Jerseys[/url]
[url=http://www.voguesneakers.com/product.asp?bigclassid=65]NHLJerseys[/url]
[url=http://www.voguesneakers.com/product.asp?bigclassid=66]MLB Jerseys[/url]
[url=http://www.voguesneakers.com/product.asp?bigclassid=61]NBA Jerseys[/url]
[url=http://www.voguesneakers.com/product.asp?bigclassid=69]Bags[/url]
[url=http://www.voguesneakers.com/product.asp?bigclassid=71]Caps[/url]
[url=http://www.voguesneakers.com/product.asp?bigclassid=74]Sunglasses[/url]
[url=http://www.voguesneakers.com/product.asp?bigclassid=77]Underwear[/url]
[url=http://www.voguesneakers.com/product.asp?bigclassid=78]Leather Belt[/url]
[url=http://www.voguesneakers.com/product.asp?bigclassid=80]Bikini[/url]
[url=http://www.voguesneakers.com/index.asp]Welcome To Visit Our Website[/url] [url]http://www.voguesneakers.com[/url]]]></summary>
			<author>
				<name><![CDATA[nikefei]]></name>
				<uri>http://www.savealabamapact.com/forum/user570.html</uri>
			</author>
			<updated>2010-07-28T08:03:01Z</updated>
			<id>http://www.savealabamapact.com/forum/topic241-wholesale-cheap-jordansnikesair-maxair-force-1-new-posts.html</id>
		</entry>
		<entry>
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[4th Lawsuit filed in January]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" href="http://www.savealabamapact.com/forum/topic194-4th-lawsuit-filed-in-january-new-posts.html"/>
			<summary type="html"><![CDATA[I've just read the [url=http://www.treasury.alabama.gov/pact/Documents/PACT%20Lawsuit%204%20Complaint%201-6-2010.pdf]4th lawsuit[/url] filed on 1/6/10. Wow. I had heard that the laws governing PACT were substantially changed earlier this decade, but had never before been able to read the prior law. I seriously doubt that many of our legislators know what the prior law said, and I bet that until this lawsuit was filed Ivey et al did not know either.

[b]Anyone who purchased a PACT contract prior to 5/9/01 should read this lawsuit.[/b]

[b]Everyone who has any doubt that tuition was guaranteed by law should read this lawsuit.[/b]

Pay close attention to items 27-31 on pages 7-8.

Kudos to these attorneys for filing a lawsuit that is relevant, worthy of current consideration, and immediately enforceable by the courts. The courts can and should mandate tuition payment, and then the legislature can seek a funding solution without having people wearing green t-shirts always lurking around the corner, watching, and voting. I also encourage anyone reading this to forward a link to their representative.

Additional note - The plaintiff and attorney in this lawsuit is actually the same as w/ [url=http://www.treasury.alabama.gov/pact/Documents/PACT%20Lawsuit%20P%20Amd%20Complt.pdf]Lawsuit #1[/url] filed last March but withdrawn soon thereafter. I suspect it was withdrawn as there was nothing actionable for a court to rule on in that lawsuit since all tuition has been paid. This lawsuit is very different as it cites the differences in interpretation of the law and how that [i]currently[/i] impacts the decision to stay w/ PACT or to cancel that the board has forced on all of us to make right now. I suspect that these attorneys would not have re-filed this time w/out feeling strongly that this will be worthy of a court ruling as to whether tuition was guaranteed, at least with respect to the Class A plaintiffs.]]></summary>
			<author>
				<name><![CDATA[KBinHoover]]></name>
				<uri>http://www.savealabamapact.com/forum/user261.html</uri>
			</author>
			<updated>2010-04-30T14:17:18Z</updated>
			<id>http://www.savealabamapact.com/forum/topic194-4th-lawsuit-filed-in-january-new-posts.html</id>
		</entry>
		<entry>
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[PACT Success]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" href="http://www.savealabamapact.com/forum/topic219-pact-success-new-posts.html"/>
			<summary type="html"><![CDATA[I want to thank the likes of Huckaby, Lambert, Thrasher and those of you who have been on the front line of the PACT movement in various locations around the state. While many of us sent e-mails to our representatives and generally talked up the importance of PACT, these people were the face of PACT. The new PACT legislation would not have happened without their efforts. When the original news of PACT's demise came out, the PACT constituency struck fast and never let go. A great lesson in Civics. Thanks very much.

Rich Donnell
Montgomery]]></summary>
			<author>
				<name><![CDATA[dhpeacher]]></name>
				<uri>http://www.savealabamapact.com/forum/user67.html</uri>
			</author>
			<updated>2010-04-28T18:52:25Z</updated>
			<id>http://www.savealabamapact.com/forum/topic219-pact-success-new-posts.html</id>
		</entry>
		<entry>
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[Committee sends up a puff of white smoke!]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" href="http://www.savealabamapact.com/forum/topic218-committee-sends-up-a-puff-of-white-smoke-new-posts.html"/>
			<summary type="html"><![CDATA[No, we don't have a new pope, but it seems we have reached a [url=http://blog.al.com/spotnews/2010/04/lawmakers_come_up_with_comprom.html]compromise[/url]. Still needs to be voted on by House and Senate, but seems very promising! 

(Could Hubbert have enough clout to kill this?)]]></summary>
			<author>
				<name><![CDATA[KBinHoover]]></name>
				<uri>http://www.savealabamapact.com/forum/user261.html</uri>
			</author>
			<updated>2010-04-22T20:44:16Z</updated>
			<id>http://www.savealabamapact.com/forum/topic218-committee-sends-up-a-puff-of-white-smoke-new-posts.html</id>
		</entry>
		<entry>
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[What is really happening at the Legislature and elsewhere.]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" href="http://www.savealabamapact.com/forum/topic192-what-is-really-happening-at-the-legislature-and-elsewhere-new-posts.html"/>
			<summary type="html"><![CDATA[Remember this--it is never as it seems at the Legislature.  Rarely does someone come out and honestly say they are against a bill. More often, a bill dies for failure of affirmative votes, or a failure to get high enough on the special order calender, or a failure for a committee to obtain a quorom.

I support reasonable efforts to achieve a negotiated solution regarding the PACT, simply because it might provide the best possible outcome.  If that doesnt work (and I dont think it will) a resolution through one of the lawsuits against the state, and the fiduciaries, appears to be the next best option.  An amended version of the pending Montgomery lawsuit might work. 

I read a note of thanks to Paul Hubbard for supporting using the Ed. Trust Fund under certain circumstances to help fix the PACT. I would be shocked, however, if Hubbard would in reality ever allow the Educ. Trust Fund to be used.  

I would also be surprised if the timing of Lucy Baxley's comments were accidental. They fit perfectly with the state's defense against paying the contracts, and are a boost to AEA and others to kill a PACT rescue.

The only legislative chance for this bill is a very organized, concerted effort, in which each legislator is made to feel as if his seat is in jeapordy if he dosnt vote a particular way.  That is not happening at present.]]></summary>
			<author>
				<name><![CDATA[pattilambert]]></name>
				<uri>http://www.savealabamapact.com/forum/user373.html</uri>
			</author>
			<updated>2010-04-20T12:04:54Z</updated>
			<id>http://www.savealabamapact.com/forum/topic192-what-is-really-happening-at-the-legislature-and-elsewhere-new-posts.html</id>
		</entry>
		<entry>
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[Stop the maddness; think a little bit.]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" href="http://www.savealabamapact.com/forum/topic214-stop-the-maddness-think-a-little-bit-new-posts.html"/>
			<summary type="html"><![CDATA[Pact history is now close to 20 years old, the first three years contracts stated the word guaranteed, but afterwards the word guaranteed was removed. Wonder why? 
We currently have two children in a State University and we pay tuition just like everyone else. We decided not to invest in PACT after discussion with a financial advisor. We felt we could invest in the market just like PACT was doing and come out just as well. We have seen decreases in our investments just like PACT, however the investments have made a super come back over the past year and are posed to continue, again this is no guarantee either.
My point is this. I agree that those contract which stated guarantee should be paid and whatever is left over paid out until the money is exhausted. 
It's unfair to the universities and to others who will have to pay for your children if the tuition is capped. PACT was a good concept but the way it was invested was not. Contracts early on where to cheap and therefore the results are what you have now. I say pay it out to all and then go and invest your money, at least this way you know what you really have. Don't expect me to pay for your children as well as my own.]]></summary>
			<author>
				<name><![CDATA[dhpeacher]]></name>
				<uri>http://www.savealabamapact.com/forum/user538.html</uri>
			</author>
			<updated>2010-04-17T20:26:52Z</updated>
			<id>http://www.savealabamapact.com/forum/topic214-stop-the-maddness-think-a-little-bit-new-posts.html</id>
		</entry>
		<entry>
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[Tuition Increases:  Issue For ALL Students]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" href="http://www.savealabamapact.com/forum/topic216-tuition-increases-issue-for-all-students-new-posts.html"/>
			<summary type="html"><![CDATA[I'm really offended that univeresities have pitted PACT students against non-PACT students . . . and suggested that non-PACT students will have to pay the tuition for PACT students if the tuition cap is approved.  I am not asking non-PACT students to do anything for my PACT contract holder . . . but I am telling the State to honor its contract.  I do understand politics, but this tactic is unconscionable . . . and now I am mad!  I expect what I paid for, and I do NOT expect other students to make that payment.  I also resent the implication that PACT students want non-PACT students to pay for their education.  That is a lie.

As a result, I'm taking a bit different approach in my communication with legislators (and universities). The impact of the tuition cap discussion should not be making the 90% of non-PACT students pay the tuition gap for the 10% of PACT students - rather, the real issue is the what is happening with tuition increases for ALL students (PACT and non-PACT). 

I think all public universities should limit tuition increases for ALL students to 2 1/2% at least until 2016 when the economy is predicted to get better, or at least tie increases to the cost of living.   I know universities have taken a hit in legislative funding, but Alabama families also have taken a hard hit.  Has your salary increased an average of 7.7% for the last nine years?  Will your salary increase 13-14% for each of the next two years (Auburn's announced tuition increases)?

The unemployment rate in February was over 11% statewide, with 22 counties showing an unemployment rate of 15% or more.   Alabama families are hurting.

At the least, universities should be required to post a tuition increase plan for a five-year schedule - no more announcing tuition increases in March to May or even August that go into effect that same Fall.  In my opinion, universities also should give specific plans for what they will do with the increase and provide an opportunity for parents, students, legislators, and alumni to offer input.   If the increase will support increases for faculty salaries, I might be in favor of it.  If it is to support to construction of new facilities, maybe not . . . at least, not in this economy.

The question is NOT whether it is fair for non-PACT students to pay the tuition gap for PACT students.  The question is what tuition level is fair for ALL students.  Alabamians are hurting . . . universities should be part of the solution.

I]]></summary>
			<author>
				<name><![CDATA[kittycollier]]></name>
				<uri>http://www.savealabamapact.com/forum/user18.html</uri>
			</author>
			<updated>2010-04-16T02:10:36Z</updated>
			<id>http://www.savealabamapact.com/forum/topic216-tuition-increases-issue-for-all-students-new-posts.html</id>
		</entry>
		<entry>
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[Blogs/Opinion Articles]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" href="http://www.savealabamapact.com/forum/topic204-blogsopinion-articles-new-posts.html"/>
			<summary type="html"><![CDATA[If you see blog articles that you would like to share on this website -- please post in this area of the forum for others -- and your comments, etc. of course too...

Here is one to get us started:

[url]http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/college_guide/blog/dear_alabama_about_that_pact.php?page=all&print=true[/url]]]></summary>
			<author>
				<name><![CDATA[ParentPACT]]></name>
				<uri>http://www.savealabamapact.com/forum/user6.html</uri>
			</author>
			<updated>2010-04-15T22:04:08Z</updated>
			<id>http://www.savealabamapact.com/forum/topic204-blogsopinion-articles-new-posts.html</id>
		</entry>
		<entry>
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[Is a PACT Contract a Security]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" href="http://www.savealabamapact.com/forum/topic217-is-a-pact-contract-a-security-new-posts.html"/>
			<summary type="html"><![CDATA[Someone needs to look into whether or not the PACT program contracts could actually be considered a Security. It appears to me that the Pact contract that parents received could possibly be considered an "investment contract" as defined by the Alabama Securities Act. Just curious, has anyone thought of approaching the Director of the Securities Commission, as to whether or not the misrepresentations made during the sale of the investment contracts is a violation of the Securities Act and therefore a felony? 
If it isn't why? 
What actually determines whether or not it is or isn't a security?]]></summary>
			<author>
				<name><![CDATA[ParentPACT]]></name>
				<uri>http://www.savealabamapact.com/forum/user541.html</uri>
			</author>
			<updated>2010-04-15T21:53:51Z</updated>
			<id>http://www.savealabamapact.com/forum/topic217-is-a-pact-contract-a-security-new-posts.html</id>
		</entry>
		<entry>
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[So now the Conference Committee begins -]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" href="http://www.savealabamapact.com/forum/topic215-so-now-the-conference-committee-begins-new-posts.html"/>
			<summary type="html"><![CDATA[Not unexpectedly, [url=http://blog.al.com/spotnews/2010/04/alabama_house_senate_split_on.html]Senate rejects House version of bill[/url] due to caps on tuition rates.]]></summary>
			<author>
				<name><![CDATA[KBinHoover]]></name>
				<uri>http://www.savealabamapact.com/forum/user261.html</uri>
			</author>
			<updated>2010-04-13T20:50:05Z</updated>
			<id>http://www.savealabamapact.com/forum/topic215-so-now-the-conference-committee-begins-new-posts.html</id>
		</entry>
		<entry>
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[So now we have agreement to give $236M to PACT, but ...]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" href="http://www.savealabamapact.com/forum/topic213-so-now-we-have-agreement-to-give-236m-to-pact-but-new-posts.html"/>
			<summary type="html"><![CDATA[but one bill includes the 2.5% cap and the other does not. Here's what the committee should do (assuming the Senate rejects the version w/ the cap):

1) Pass the bill giving the $236M to PACT and [u]include[/u] the 2.5% cap but beginning in 2011.

2) Also pass HB775 (where the Trust Fund makes up any deficit) [u]but add a clause that would remove the 2.5% cap[/u]. HB775 (or whatever the committee calls their version) will require a vote in November. 

[b][color=blue]This would effectively allow voters to choose a tuition cap or Trust Fund solution.[/color][/b] Either way, PACT is funded and expensive lawsuits are avoided. And, legislators are heroes for funding PACT and allowing the public to determine how. University leaders would undoubtedly come out in huge favor of the Trust Fund solution to void the cap.

[b]What absolutely cannot happen is to have this legislative session end w/out getting the $236M into PACT. This would be a travesty and kick off the expensive class action lawsuits.[/b]]]></summary>
			<author>
				<name><![CDATA[KBinHoover]]></name>
				<uri>http://www.savealabamapact.com/forum/user261.html</uri>
			</author>
			<updated>2010-04-08T23:52:01Z</updated>
			<id>http://www.savealabamapact.com/forum/topic213-so-now-we-have-agreement-to-give-236m-to-pact-but-new-posts.html</id>
		</entry>
		<entry>
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[Rep Bentley ALMOST gets it right.]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" href="http://www.savealabamapact.com/forum/topic209-rep-bentley-almost-gets-it-right-new-posts.html"/>
			<summary type="html"><![CDATA[Bentley is proposing a new bill - [url=http://alisondb.legislature.state.al.us/acas/ACTIONViewFrame.asp?TYPE=Instrument&INST=HB775&DOCPATH=searchableinstruments/2010RS/Printfiles/&PHYDOCPATH=//alisondb/acas/searchableinstruments/2010RS/PrintFiles/&DOCNAMES=HB775-int.pdf,,]HB775[/url] - which would borrow from the AL Trust Fund to shore up any deficits in PACT. This is [i]almost[/i] what we need.

The problem is the concept of borrowing. It requires funds to later be returned. If PACT had any potential future revenue to repay the Trust then no actuarial deficit would exist in the first place. As is, his bill is a huge waste of time. But, with one small change, it would be perfect. Simply replace the word "borrow" w/ the word "take". 

While the bill w/ tuition caps would solve the PACT problem, it is heavily opposed and in serious jeopardy of not passing. Little's version of the bill would also move the $236M to PACT, which is not quite enough, but could then be subsidized w/ Bentley's proposed bill if the word "borrow" were to be changed. This would result in total payments of around $200M or so from the Trust Fund over the next 15 or 20 years. That's peanuts to this $3.3B Trust that has [url=http://www.treasury.state.al.us/Content/Documents/ATF%20Historical%20Data.pdf]averaged growing by $200M/yr[/url].

If Bentley wants to propose a constitutional amendment, do this: [b]1) Guarantee all PACT tuition payments; 2) move the existing PACT funds including the $236M (if we get it) to the ATF; 3) let the ATF board manage the funds as deemed appropriate; and 4) pay any deficits from the ATF.[/b] 

Or don't do it. The courts will later mandate it anyway, and the ATF is the state's only source of savings, and continues to grow w/ future oil and gas royalties pouring in.]]></summary>
			<author>
				<name><![CDATA[lrterry]]></name>
				<uri>http://www.savealabamapact.com/forum/user261.html</uri>
			</author>
			<updated>2010-04-02T14:13:47Z</updated>
			<id>http://www.savealabamapact.com/forum/topic209-rep-bentley-almost-gets-it-right-new-posts.html</id>
		</entry>
		<entry>
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[Taxes]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" href="http://www.savealabamapact.com/forum/topic208-taxes-new-posts.html"/>
			<summary type="html"><![CDATA[The following was sent by one of our Madison Co SAP members:

"You may have this already posted on the site, but the Alabama Income Tax code was amended beginning in the 2008 tax year to allow current year contributions to Alabama PACT as a deduction to the contributor's taxable income. This is limited to $5,000 per year. ($10,000 for joint filers). If non-qualifying deductions (i.e. surrenders) are made and the amount had been previously deducted from the taxpayer's income, an amount equal to the non-qualifying deduction will have to be added back as income in subsequent filing period. 
 
The code change does apply to 2009 filing as well; however, unless you made payments into a qualifying plan during the tax filing years (2008, 2009, forward) your payments into the plan are not deductible. People with fully paid, but unused contracts which were purchased prior to 2008 cannot deduct their payments in 2008 or beyond. 
 
Again, this is just FYI, but may further influence decisions on contract holders considering getting out.
 
Please refer inquiries to the State of Alabama tax code for all of the details."]]></summary>
			<author>
				<name><![CDATA[dhpeacher]]></name>
				<uri>http://www.savealabamapact.com/forum/user23.html</uri>
			</author>
			<updated>2010-03-30T03:25:26Z</updated>
			<id>http://www.savealabamapact.com/forum/topic208-taxes-new-posts.html</id>
		</entry>
		<entry>
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[from AU Pres Jay Gogue]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" href="http://www.savealabamapact.com/forum/topic206-from-au-pres-jay-gogue-new-posts.html"/>
			<summary type="html"><![CDATA[Obviously Gogue is anti-tuition cap, but he does support getting the $236M to PACT. I hope our legislators at least get this amount moved over. At a minimum this will buy time to consider more options* while our courts mandate guarantees to be paid.

[url=http://auburn-magazine.blogspot.com/2010/03/au-president-gogue-addresses-pact.html]Gogue's thoughts[/url]

* I tried not to bring up the Trust Fund again, and I thought I could do it but just couldn't, so I've edited my original message just in case any of our legislators are lurking. The best, and perhaps only, option to fully fund PACT before costly lawsuits start to arise is to tap the Trust Fund. Certainly if $1B is available for infrastructure (as proposed by one of your peers) then some of this could first be allcoated to PACT to fund existing legal obligations before road paving begins. Or, if you don't want to directly tap the existing funds, then you could divert future O&G royalties to PACT until funded. That harms no one. Thanks for your attention, and good luck.]]></summary>
			<author>
				<name><![CDATA[lrterry]]></name>
				<uri>http://www.savealabamapact.com/forum/user261.html</uri>
			</author>
			<updated>2010-03-28T12:19:51Z</updated>
			<id>http://www.savealabamapact.com/forum/topic206-from-au-pres-jay-gogue-new-posts.html</id>
		</entry>
		<entry>
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[Business Breakfast at AUM Featuring Jay Gouge (AU) & Mac Potera (UA)]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" href="http://www.savealabamapact.com/forum/topic200-business-breakfast-at-aum-featuring-jay-gouge-au-mac-potera-ua-new-posts.html"/>
			<summary type="html"><![CDATA[Montgomery/Prattville Area Folks - 
Date:  March 23, 2010
Time:  7:15-9:00 a.m.
What:  Business Breakfast at Auburn University at Montgomery
Speakers:  Dr. Gouge, President of Auburn University, and Dr. Portera, Chancellor of the University of Alabama System
Topic:  Issues Facing Higher Education
Cost:  $25/person
To Register:  Call 334-244-3804 or email ConEdInfo@aum.edu 

Here is our chance to hear the AU president and UA chancellor talk about higher education issues.  My guess is that there is a good chance PACT will come up - and all the reasons why the two universities cannot accept a tuition cap.  Let's have a great turnout at the breakfast to keep the discussion "balanced."  Would be great if attendees wear the green t-shirts!

You don't have to be from the Montgomery area to attend; it is open to anyone.  Also, if you are employed, your business may be willing to cover the cost.

The AUM Division of Continuing Education hosts the Business Breakfast Series which brings the business and education communities together to hear topics on state, local, and national issues.]]></summary>
			<author>
				<name><![CDATA[kittycollier]]></name>
				<uri>http://www.savealabamapact.com/forum/user18.html</uri>
			</author>
			<updated>2010-03-26T15:15:08Z</updated>
			<id>http://www.savealabamapact.com/forum/topic200-business-breakfast-at-aum-featuring-jay-gouge-au-mac-potera-ua-new-posts.html</id>
		</entry>
</feed>
