I was disgusted to find that my college was part of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the organization which is currently spending millions of dollars to defeat Democrats and overturn the programs that I support. After a bit of research, I discovered that there were at least 5 California universities which have a direct link to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce; UC Berkeley, UC Irvine, UCLA, UC San Diego and UC San Francisco. I'd always thought that colleges and universities funded by taxpayers were prohibited from supporting one political party over the other, so I decided to get some answers.
I contacted the president of my alma mater and and asked him a few questions. A spokesman for President Milton Gordon replied;
California State University, Fullerton is a member of and supports several chambers of commerce in Orange County through member dues, including the Irvine Chamber of Commerce. Membership in these organizations allow the university to participate as a partner in the local business community. Let me also make very clear that membership alone in a given chamber does not mean that we support their political activity. The university is strictly prohibited from using our funding for such purposes and does not do so.
Two points here; It is clear that CSUF is giving money to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce through membership dues-- thus funding the Chamber's political ads. Their argument seems to be that this money is not being used for political purposes. This is the same point made by the U.S. Chamber about keeping foreign money out of their political advertising, and frankly, it just doesn't pass the smell test. If I give you money and you put it in your left pocket, then you go and spend the money in your right pocket-- what's the difference? You got my money-- money is money.
Secondly, by their own admission, state-funded universities are not allowed to participate in political activity-- and yet they are. Yes, the Chamber probably does some things that a university might find useful-- so did Apartheid South Africa and so does British Petroleum, how does that absolve them of all the other things they are doing? It doesn't.
By remaining silent and not protesting the Chamber's slide into political partisanship, my college is sanctioning the political views of the Chamber. By not removing themselves from the Chamber, they are tainted by the association. By their membership, even if they didn't give one cent to the U.S. Chamber, they would still be guilty of supporting political hackery.
I noticed that UC Irvine was a member of the same local chamber and had the same connection to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and so I decided to contact the president of the UC system, Mark Yudof, and ask him about it. I was astonished to discover that he had resigned from the California Chamber of Commerce earlier in the year because of it's overtly political positions. A spokesperson for the office of the UC president said,
Our president was a member of the California Chamber of Commerce’s 100-plus member board, but he suspended his participation when he learned the board was considering a political endorsement saying, "As the President of a public university, I cannot take sides in electoral politics. I must preserve my politically agnostic status."
I was pleased to get a thoughtful response from the president's office, but it seems to me that if Mark Yudof thought the California Chamber of Commerce had become too political, why hadn't he advised his universities to sever ties with the organization? And if he thought it was inappropriate for himself to participate, why was it appropriate for the schools he oversees, tax payer-funded institutions, to participate?
These schools are clearly giving moral and material support to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. This would appear to be a blatant ethical violation, and probably a legal one. However, rather than distancing himself from the U.S. Chamber's controversial support of the Republican Party and its political agenda, Yudof carefully pulled the sheets down, fluffed the pillows, and decided he needed to snuggle;
"My experience with the Chamber has been very positive. I have learned a great deal and enjoyed the interaction with business leaders. Moreover, it is imperative that the University of California and the California business community work together to strengthen our economic recovery.
... and defeat President Obama's agenda? Is that what you're saying? Really?
This is unprecedented political activity by a taxpayer-funded organization, and why Yudof has not demanded that all the schools under his authority resign from the U.S. Chamber is a spectacular failure on his part. There is a direct link from California's universities to the U.S. Chamber's strident political attack ads against the Democrats. It is not the purpose of a public university to help fuel political attacks, and it is an insult to the student body of California's many colleges and universities to be unwilling pawns in the political arena. Unless the UC system severs this relationship immediately and resigns their Chamber membership, it can be categorically stated that the UC system is engaged in an insidious form of political propaganda.
The only way I see this changing is if taxpayers, students, faculty, and concerned citizens stand up against these kind of abuses. If you go to one of these schools, make sure to hold these bureaucrats accountable. Maybe it's an error of judgement, maybe they don't know, or maybe, as Mr. Yudof seems to be doing, they're pushing an agenda right under your nose. Whatever it is, the only way they'll change is if you hold them accountable.
For lack of time I focused my energies on the UC system. It can be assumed that the Cal State system is just as intertwined, as Chancellor Charles Reed is currently a board member of the California Chamber-- the same chamber that Yudof found to be too political for him.