|

Let’s Hope Someone Read the Correction

I stumbled upon the correction article below in the LA Times that appeared last fall.  Let’s hope someone reads correction articles.  It also contains some interesting info.

Readers’ Rep: University of California a big political donor — but that’s misleading

Deirdre Edgar, Oct. 26, 2012


An article in Thursday’s Business section about campaign contributions in the Massachusetts Senate race between Republican incumbent Scott Brown and Democrat Elizabeth Warren included a surprising name among the list of top donors. According to the chart, the No. 5 donor to Warren was the University of California, with a total of $38,400 in contributions.

Readers, aware of recent budget cuts and tuition increases in the UC system, were stunned. “It is hard to understand the University of California contributing to the Senate race in Massachusetts when the UC system is so financially troubled,” David Powell of Encino wrote to The Times. Howard Fields of Woodland Hills emailed, “There is no conceivably justifiable explanation for UC to squander California taxpayers’ money on political causes at all, but sending money for a partisan Massachusetts campaign when constantly complaining about UC’s financial crisis should be criminal.” And Carolyn Robinson of Pasadena wondered, “With the financial condition of all educational institutions in the state of California, why are we spending taxpayer funds on an election in any state? It is it legal to spend taxpayer funds to support a candidate, and if so, why?”

The fine print at the bottom of the chart explains, to some extent: Money comes from employees and/or political action committees of the companies or organizations. What that means is that the University of California as an institution is not making contributions to, or spending taxpayer money on, any political candidate. It’s the UC professors, administrators and other staff members – and members of their immediate families – who are doing so individually or as members of a group.

UC employees are active political donors. For the 2012 election, the University of California is President Obama’s largest contributor, giving $927,568 as of Oct. 21, according to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics. The system has about 150,000 full-time employees.

Is it legal, as Robinson asked, to spend taxpayer funds to support a candidate? No.

The UC notes in legal guidance that “University funds (including University paid time and equipment) may not lawfully be used for campaign purposes.” But individual participation is allowed: “An employee does not give up his or her constitutional rights upon joining a public agency. With only limited exceptions, no restrictions may be placed on the private political activities of public employees.”

From http://www.latimes.com/news/local/readers-rep/la-me-rr-university-of-california-campaign-contributions-20121026,0,2504265.story

I suspect that more people read articles than read corrections of articles.  If you encounter someone with the belief that UC contributes money to candidates in California or elsewhere, point him/her to this correction.

Similar Posts

  • |

    Spotlight on Speech Codes, 2022

    Fire (Foundation for Individual Rights in Education) has just released its yearly summary of the state of free speech at 481 public and private colleges and universities in the United States. FIRE defines free speech as “the overwhelming majority of speech protected by the First Amendment.” Few exceptions exist. The survey addresses a wide variety of issues with relevance to free speech, including: Free Speech Zone PoliciesPrior RestraintsSecurity Fee PoliciesPolicies Governing Speakers, Demonstrations, and RalliesPolicies on Bias and Hate SpeechInternet Usage PoliciesPolicies on Tolerance, Respect, and CivilityBullying PoliciesThreats and IntimidationHarassmentPolicies on Bias and Hate SpeechObscenityIncitement The report is both disappointing…

  • | | | | | | |

    Listen to Part of the Regents Afternoon Session of 1-22-2014

    As we have noted in numerous prior posts, the Regents refuse to archive their meetings beyond one year.  So we dutifully record the sessions in real time.  Below is a link to part of the afternoon session of Jan. 22.  This segment is mainly the Committee on Educational Policy.  Gov. Brown was in attendance.  We will separately (later) provide links just to certain Brown segments.  But for now, we provide a continuous recording. There was discussion of designating certain areas of UC-Merced as nature reserves, followed by discussion of a new telescope.  The discussion then turned to online ed and…

  • |

    Oversize Load?

    From the Sacramento Bee: …(T)the University of California’s academic student workers union recently filed a complaint against the UC Office of the President demanding that discussions about class size be a part of their contract negotiations. The union has been bargaining with UC since last summer, and its contract expired at the end of the year… The UC Student-Workers Union, which represents more than 12,000 teaching assistants, tutors and readers across the UC system, is seeking a regular forum to talk about class size with faculty and UC management, said Josh Brahinsky, a Ph.D. candidate in the history of consciousness…

  • | | | |

    Napolitano Responds to UCLA’s Moreno Report

    Moreno UC President Napolitano issued a response to the (former California Supreme Court Justice Carlos) “Moreno Report” of Oct. 2013, formally titled “Independent Investigative Report on Acts of Bias and Discrimination Involving Faculty at the University of California, Los Angeles.”  It includes directives to all campus chancellors: 1) Every campus should designate an official to serve as its lead discrimination officer. This official is responsible for ensuring that an appropriate response is made to all reports of perceived acts of discrimination, bias, and harassment involving faculty, students, and staff from all parts of the campus. * The discrimination officer will…

  • | | | | | |

    The Resurrection?

    [More in our Regents coverage.  See earlier posts.]  The Regents spent some time on the old Master Plan for Higher Ed.  There was discussion, according to news reports, among representatives of UC, CSU, and the community colleges on better coordination. …“This report shines an important light on the need to have a central body whose sole focus is guiding the Legislature, governor and our three higher education segments as we plan and build for the future,” (Assembly speaker John Pérez) said. Full story at http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-college-reports-20140123,0,5215408.story Um, does no one remember  CPEC, which still exists in ghostly form as a website…

  • | | | | | |

    Issue Heating Up

    We noted in yesterday’s posting (in the update portion) on the Regents public comment session that there were spokespeople complaining about anti-Israel activities on UC campuses including course credit on one campus, pushes for divestment, etc.  Earlier postings noted statements by the UC prez and several chancellors (including Block) opposing an academic boycott of Israel by several academic societies.  Today, the LA Times reports: A group of lawmakers has formed the California Legislative Jewish Caucus to weigh in on issues of priority to members, including immigration, civil rights and Israel, according to its chairman, state Sen. Marty Block (D-San Diego)… …