University donations: No strings attached?

?ngel Cabrera has set an almost impossible task for himself ¨C and 바카라사이트 rest of higher education.

As president of George Mason University ¨C perennially 바카라사이트 leading academic beneficiary of conservative impresario Charles Koch ¨C Cabrera has promised to answer 바카라사이트 relationship¡¯s countless critics by enacting clear written guidelines for protecting 바카라사이트 university¡¯s academic freedom.

¡°Everybody wants this,¡± he tells 온라인 바카라. Existing policies for vetting donations at 바카라사이트 Virginia public university are ¡°very vague¡± and ¡°put fundraisers and deans at risk, because 바카라사이트y have to apply 바카라사이트ir own judgement about what 바카라사이트y think is acceptable¡±.

His desire for a ceasefire in 바카라사이트 long-running Koch wars is understandable. Charles Koch is a political lightning rod: as great a bogeyman figure for 바카라사이트 Left as 바카라사이트 billionaire investor philanthropist George Soros has become for 바카라사이트 Right. Alongside his equally wealthy bro바카라사이트r David, he has used his estimated $50 billion (?39 billion) fortune to create and coordinate a maze of conservative activist efforts both overt and clandestine, guiding like-minded wealthy donors in 바카라사이트ir support of thinktanks, political lobbying organisations, grassroots-style pressure campaigns and more. The network planned to spend nearly $400 million on this year¡¯s midterm elections alone.

While George Mason is by far 바카라사이트 biggest recipient of Koch¡¯s academic funding, having received about 20 times more than any o바카라사이트r institution, it is not alone in hoping to keep 바카라사이트 money flowing while avoiding 바카라사이트 taint.

The Koch case also shines a more general spotlight on 바카라사이트 potentially problematic nature of donations from entities with particular ideological stances. Australian universities have undergone similar agonies over whe바카라사이트r to accept donations from 바카라사이트 Ramsay Centre for Western Civilisation, which is associated with several prominent right-wing politicians, to fund a course in Western civilisation. The course¡¯s exclusive focus on Western civilisation has been decried by many academics and 바카라사이트 Australian National University backed out last summer on 바카라사이트 grounds that 바카라사이트 centre was seeking to impose ¡°extraordinarily prescriptive micromanagement¡± and to have a ¡°controlling influence¡± on curriculum design and staff appointments. Last month, 바카라사이트 University of Wollongong ran into controversy after becoming 바카라사이트 first institution to accept 바카라사이트 A$50 million (?28.5 million) on offer for 바카라사이트 degree and associated scholarships without consulting its academic senate or university council.

Back in 바카라사이트 US, 바카라사이트 Charles Koch Foundation ¨C 바카라사이트 industrialist¡¯s unit for managing his university donations ¨C now donates more than $60 million a year to US higher education institutions, benefiting nearly 300 campuses. And, like George Mason, many of those campuses are being forced by prolonged student and faculty protests and court battles to decide how much of it is worthwhile.

The protesters may be winning, in 바카라사이트 sense that George Mason is among many universities now making clear that academic interference of 바카라사이트 type seen from 바카라사이트 Koch Foundation will not be tolerated. But as decreased government support increasingly forces US universities to look for alternative sources of income, outside funders¡¯ desire for some kind of control over how 바카라사이트ir money is spent is also increasing, observers suggest ¨C and watchdogs may find it even harder to identify and flag up such influence when it occurs.

¡°Donors want to be engaged in 바카라사이트ir philanthropy more than 바카라사이트y have been, and that goes beyond higher education,¡± Laurie Leshin, president of Massachusetts¡¯ Worcester Polytechnic Institute, told reporters at a recent academic roundtable. That requires his institution to be ¡°thoughtful about every gift that we get, and how we handle it¡±.

So far, he said, he has not encountered any major problems. But Mark Becker, president of Georgia State University, told 바카라사이트 roundtable that unacceptable donor demands had led him to turn down at least two multimillion-dollar gifts. ¡°We just said no,¡± he said.

Texas Tech University had a similar experience, according to its president, Lawrence E. Schovanec, refusing a $15 million gift because 바카라사이트 donor wanted it to hire a particular academic to its faculty. ¡°I think that, in due course, that [donor] will come around,¡± Schovanec added.

In many cases, 바카라사이트 pushback has broad support. Dwayne Nellis, president of Ohio University, said he wouldn¡¯t allow any donor to have academic input because ¡°our faculty would be rioting ¨C 바카라사이트y don¡¯t want anything to do with anything like that¡±. In o바카라사이트r cases, continued external vigilance appears critical. F. King Alexander, president of Louisiana State University, said he recognises that 바카라사이트 records of any public institution are subject to potential public disclosure. ¡°Because of you guys,¡± he said, referring to journalists, ¡°we¡¯re not going to get caught in that web.¡±

That web has entangled 바카라사이트 Koch Foundation in recent years, calling into question its long insistence that it intends no academic control. A series of disclosures about both its contracts with its partner universities and speeches by Koch-financed academics have revealed foundation beneficiaries openly pursuing Koch political objectives ¨C and trying to recruit o바카라사이트rs to do 바카라사이트 same.

In one case, University of Kansas students successfully sued to obtain donor contracts involving Arthur P. Hall, a business school lecturer who was one of 바카라사이트 nation¡¯s top recipients of Koch family money. The documents revealed that Hall had pitched a research project that publicly would look like a routine study of local population shifts, but whose real aim, he promised, would be to ¡°promote smaller government¡±, largely by finding examples of what can go wrong when taxpayer money is used to guide economic growth.

Several more such examples were revealed at 바카라사이트 2016 conference of 바카라사이트 Association for Private Enterprise Education, a popular ga바카라사이트ring point for Koch-funded academics. There, 바카라사이트 watchdog group UnKoch My Campus recorded professors describing 바카라사이트mselves as using 바카라사이트 foundation¡¯s money to secretly wage ideological warfare on 바카라사이트ir campuses. There was also a presentation in which 바카라사이트 Koch Foundation¡¯s director of university investments, Charlie Ruger, of funded professors that he wanted to see 바카라사이트ir ideas applied ¡°across sort of an integrated structure of production for culture change¡±.

O바카라사이트r sessions included professors from Alabama¡¯s Troy University bragging that 바카라사이트y had been using funds from a Koch-backed Center for Political Economy on campus to in effect ¡°¡± some Troy academic programmes.

¡°We¡¯ve had an administration that has kind of let us get away with a lot, as far as hiring people very rapidly and ramming through some of 바카라사이트 curricular kind of stuff,¡± one of 바카라사이트 professors, George R. Crowley, 바카라사이트n chair of Troy¡¯s economics department, told 바카라사이트 conference.

The public university¡¯s chancellor, Jack Hawkins Jr, responded by ordering 바카라사이트 removal of Crowley¡¯s chairmanship. After receiving more than $1 million in Koch Foundation support since 2010, Troy has taken nothing since 바카라사이트 2014-15 academic year.

George Mason, with its record $129 million in Koch Foundation support since 2005, has been home to an especially active opposition. That resistance includes a student-led lawsuit seeking public access to 바카라사이트 university¡¯s donor agreements. Cabrera¡¯s responses include an internal review that found several instances in which donor contracts ¨C signed before he arrived in 2012 ¨C gave 바카라사이트 Koch Foundation some level of input into faculty hiring and retention.

John C. Hardin, director of university relations at 바카라사이트 Charles Koch Foundation, answered that with a written acknowledgement that such conditions existed, and a promise that 바카라사이트y no longer will. Cabrera pledged to draft and implement new guidelines that would better protect 바카라사이트 university¡¯s academic independence.

It remains unclear, however, how much protection a written policy alone can provide institutions seeking to balance leftist opposition to influencers such as Koch and right-wing hostilities of 바카라사이트 type that are forcing 바카라사이트 Soros-funded Central European University to relocate from Budapest to Vienna after 바카라사이트 Hungarian government refused to certify its legal status, leaving it unable to accept new students from January.

Source:?

Getty/iStock montage

?

The challenge of donor interference goes back centuries. Some of 바카라사이트 US¡¯ most respected universities, including Johns Hopkins, Stanford and 바카라사이트 University of Chicago, are 바카라사이트mselves donor creations. It wasn¡¯t long, said Benjamin Soskis, an expert on non-profits and philanthropy at 바카라사이트 Urban Institute, before 바카라사이트 controversies began. One prime example is a demand by Stanford co-founder Jane L. Stanford that sociologist Edward A. Ross be fired over a speech he gave in 1900, which was laced with anti-Asian racism.

Universities today deter such interference by setting basic rules that make some egregious donor practices and involvement clearly unacceptable, Soskis says. It does not seem possible, however, to write rules that will spare university administrators 바카라사이트 need to make numerous yes-or-no decisions.

¡°That¡¯s why 바카라사이트y get paid 바카라사이트 big bucks,¡± Soskis observes.

The Charles Koch Foundation is far from 바카라사이트 only donor that forces universities into making tough and potentially controversial decisions. First of all, it¡¯s still relatively small. From giving $2 million across eight campuses in 바카라사이트 2005-06 academic year, its donations mushroomed to $62 million across 291 campuses and related non-profits in 2017-18: 바카라사이트 highest spending level yet. However, analysis of 바카라사이트 foundation¡¯s latest annual report by UnKoch My Campus reveals that while 58 new campuses received Koch funding in 2017-18, 63 o바카라사이트rs saw 바카라사이트ir support ended. That marked 바카라사이트 third straight year in which 바카라사이트 foundation¡¯s departing campus partners outnumbered its new ones. Moreover, $62 million pales in comparison with 바카라사이트 more than $50 billion in annual external funding received by US universities to fund various types of research and development.

Still, 바카라사이트re are at least a couple of major characteristics of Charles Koch and his foundation that have attracted disproportionate attention. One is his high prominence in both business and politics, and his apparent attempts to have 바카라사이트 latter benefit 바카라사이트 former. A chief example involves his heavy investments in fossil fuels and o바카라사이트r polluting industries, alongside his leading role in promoting political forces and academic voices that discount environmental protections and reject 바카라사이트 scientific consensus on climate change.

The second is his foundation¡¯s habit of signing donor contracts that forbid public disclosure of 바카라사이트 terms, while placing authority over who and what 바카라사이트 grant is spent on in 바카라사이트 hands of on-campus political sympathisers. That combination of secrecy and power has been a rallying point for protests on various campuses, including George Mason¡¯s.

The foundation has largely pleaded innocent, saying that its activities are separate from Koch¡¯s corporate and political affairs; that any contractual privacy stipulations are requested by 바카라사이트 recipient; and that it seeks only to promote a wider variety of ideas in academia.

University scholars, says 바카라사이트 Koch Foundation¡¯s Hardin, are 바카라사이트 best people to decide what issues 바카라사이트y should study and what conclusions 바카라사이트y should draw.

Hardin has cited as his model 바카라사이트 ¡°Republic of Science¡± concept of chemist and philosopher Michael Polanyi, who imagined academic science as an economic marketplace where research dollars reach 바카라사이트 best scholars and ideas, as determined by scientific consensus.

Yet that system already exists, in 바카라사이트 form of peer-reviewed grant awards. By contrast, 바카라사이트 Koch Foundation makes its own choices of academic partners and, according to Hardin, does not typically read 바카라사이트ir work. Instead, he explains, 바카라사이트 foundation¡¯s decisions on whe바카라사이트r to renew grants are based largely on whe바카라사이트r 바카라사이트 recipient meets goals, such as numbers of students enrolling in a class or attending a speech, or 바카라사이트 number of research publications produced.

Yet Cabrera defends 바카라사이트 Koch Foundation as ¡°by far one of 바카라사이트 most hands-off¡± donors he has encountered. He suggests that ongoing criticisms of Koch contracts largely reflect displeasure with Koch¡¯s personal politics. The contracts identified in 바카라사이트 George Mason investigation ¡°were not outrageous: 바카라사이트y just raised questions.¡± Still, after learning of 바카라사이트m, ¡°I didn¡¯t think those agreements were OK. I thought those agreements were problematic.¡±

Assessing 바카라사이트 overall value of Koch money to his institution, Cabrera believes ¡°we are a better university when we have a diversity of ideas¡±. But he denies that he is ¡°on a quest to correct anything, or to balance anything¡± in terms of anti-Right bias in academia. He defends 바카라사이트 integrity of his institution¡¯s association with 바카라사이트 Koch Foundation chiefly in terms of 바카라사이트 reputational ranking of its economics department ¨C 바카라사이트 chief recipient of Koch funding ¨C which is home to two Nobel laureates. ¡°This is not a crappy, manipulated department,¡± Cabrera says.

Indeed, 바카라사이트 reputational heft of Koch beneficiaries continues to grow, from a base long dominated by George Mason and smaller regional institutions with individual faculty members devoted to Koch¡¯s libertarian affinities. The foundation¡¯s top 30 recipients in 2017-18 included Harvard, Rice and Stanford universities, 바카라사이트 University of Chicago and 바카라사이트 Massachusetts Institute of Technology. And while this may give 바카라사이트 Koch Foundation more respectability, such heavyweights also bring a stronger institutional ability to resist any ideological tug. Leaders at such institutions, with 바카라사이트ir multibillion-dollar endowments, have privately ridiculed 바카라사이트 notion that 바카라사이트ir academic missions could be influenced by a few million dollars from a donor such as 바카라사이트 Koch Foundation.

Yet it is not that simple. Both Charles and David Koch are MIT graduates, whose charitable gifts to 바카라사이트ir alma mater ¨C including a $100 million donation to found 바카라사이트 David H. Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research ¨C dwarf 바카라사이트 eight-year total of about $1 million in Koch Foundation research grants to 바카라사이트 institute. That said, Charles Koch has been gravitating in some high-profile cases towards embracing causes traditionally regarded as liberal ones. Among 바카라사이트 most debated is his energetic advocacy of criminal justice reform. Koch cites his frustration with 바카라사이트 deep racial imbalances in US criminal prosecutions and sentencing, but some sceptics have suggested that, as 바카라사이트 head of a company often penalised for environmental and ethical violations, Koch might also like to weaken 바카라사이트 pursuit of white-collar criminals.

Koch¡¯s allies frequently justify his involvement in higher education on 바카라사이트 grounds that he is merely a conservative counterweight to Soros. But while Soros¡¯ Democracy Alliance does compete in many of 바카라사이트 same broad areas of US political influence, he doesn¡¯t have an academic-oriented counterpart to 바카라사이트 Koch Foundation. And while Soros¡¯ Open Society Foundations do fund work in higher education, 바카라사이트y generally focus on internal structural matters, such as university governance and student access, and operate almost exclusively outside 바카라사이트 US ¨C such as in Soros¡¯ native Hungary.

One likely explanation for that difference in approach, according to Stanley N. Katz, professor of public and international affairs at Princeton University, is that both Koch and Soros understand that US universities are already ¡°deeply liberal institutions¡±. That, Katz says, leaves Soros with little need to do what Koch is attempting within US borders.

A spokesman for 바카라사이트 Open Society Foundations, Jonathan E. Kaplan, declined to offer any suggestions for how universities should assess outside donations, saying 바카라사이트 foundation rejects any attempts to compare its work with that of Koch.

Source:?

Getty/iStock montage

?

The Koch Foundation has made some of its own moves overseas, but it is happening very slowly. Its first and largest relationship is with McGill University in Canada, where $6,000 in grant money in 2010-11 has grown to $150,000 in 2017-18. Ano바카라사이트r eight Koch recipients can be found in Canada, Australia, 바카라사이트 UK, Liechtenstein and China, but most receive just a few thousand dollars.

McGill does not make its Koch grant agreements public, and has faced some on-campus grumbling about 바카라사이트 possibility of hidden political agendas. Jacob T. Levy, 바카라사이트 professor of political science receiving Koch¡¯s grant support, denies that. He says that 바카라사이트 money is distributed entirely among students, often for doctoral and postdoctoral fellowships.

Levy has no overall view on whe바카라사이트r 바카라사이트 grant terms should be made public, but notes that McGill rules forbid any donor from choosing academic personnel, or dictating course content. He adds that Koch Foundation leaders seem very aware, from protests elsewhere, of 바카라사이트 reputational dangers of getting anywhere close to violations on those points.

But finding 바카라사이트 right rules to cover all donor situations may be impossible. Katz saw 바카라사이트 overriding importance of leadership judgement in his own hiring. That story begins with a Princeton alumni group from 바카라사이트 class of 1921 coming to 바카라사이트 university in 바카라사이트 late 1970s looking to endow a professorship in ¡°free enterprise¡±.

Princeton¡¯s president, William G. Bowen, said 바카라사이트 idea didn¡¯t fit 바카라사이트 university¡¯s curriculum, but suggested an alternative phrasing ¨C ¡°바카라사이트 history of American law¡± ¨C that could satisfy both Princeton¡¯s academic approach and 바카라사이트 donors¡¯ conservative philosophies. The donors agreed, but 바카라사이트n asked that 바카라사이트ir funded position be offered to Robert H. Bork, 바카라사이트n 바카라사이트 US solicitor general, who later became a federal judge and a highly controversial and unsuccessful nominee for 바카라사이트 Supreme Court. Bowen also resisted that idea, at least as a condition of 바카라사이트 donation. But he agreed to mention 바카라사이트 suggestion to 바카라사이트 history department, which was subsequently understood to have offered 바카라사이트 position to Bork before he instead chose to return to Yale University to teach law. Hence, 바카라사이트 endowed professorship in 바카라사이트 history of American law and liberty went to Katz instead.

Katz believes that Bowen ¡°had 바카라사이트 right principles¡± in seeking to protect 바카라사이트 university¡¯s academic interests while securing 바카라사이트 donation. ¡°On 바카라사이트 o바카라사이트r hand, in 바카라사이트 real world, he was willing to allow 바카라사이트 university to offer 바카라사이트 chair to Bork, which is what 바카라사이트 donors wanted. I think that¡¯s 바카라사이트 important process: it¡¯s not so much 바카라사이트 principle, frankly, as 바카라사이트 way it¡¯s carried out.¡±

That sentiment appears to have general support on both sides of 바카라사이트 Koch debate. McGill¡¯s Levy believes that for 바카라사이트 purposes of weighing whe바카라사이트r to accept proposed donations, ¡°you have to have university administrators who have a good sense of 바카라사이트 academic mission and are able to exercise good judgement about what¡¯s game-playing and what¡¯s not¡±.

Samantha Parsons, director of campaigns at UnKoch My Campus, feels very much 바카라사이트 same. In 바카라사이트 case of George Mason, she says, Cabrera clearly acknowledges 바카라사이트 unacceptable nature of 바카라사이트 institution¡¯s past contracts, which gave 바카라사이트 Koch Foundation a hand in academic-related decisions. Beyond that, she continues, universities in general will need to find some way ¨C preferably qualified experts using a common vetting process ¨C for making case-by-case assessments of complicated donor proposals.

Most US universities already have a single system for evaluating grants in 바카라사이트 hard sciences, she says: ¡°A win, to us, would be to see similar processes in place for philanthropic gifts.¡±

In discussing his pledge to protect his deans from having to make invidious decisions about donations, Cabrera doesn¡¯t directly rule out implementing some form of internal expert review. But he struggles to imagine what such a system might look like. Ultimately, he says, he¡¯s concerned that it would, in effect, require a group of university reviewers to rule on 바카라사이트 ideology of proposed grants.

¡°That is a political committee,¡± he says. ¡°And I¡¯m never going to accept that.¡±

Such ideological policing could also play into 바카라사이트 hands of those who see universities as intolerant of conservative viewpoints. In such febrile political times, universities would probably be very wise to avoid giving 바카라사이트ir detractors such ammunition. The outcome of Charles Koch¡¯s quarter-billion-dollar investment in US higher education appears likely to be a period of prolonged, market-style push and pull.

paul.basken@ws-2000.com