Power = Access + Process

The new members are:

1. Former Springfield Mayor Karen Hasara
2. Timothy Koritz, a staff anesthesiologist at Rockford Memorial Hospital
3. Pamela Strobel, retired executive vice president and chief administrative office of Exelon
4. Carlos Tortolero, the president of the National Museum of Mexican Art.

This time he beat the machine by lasting more than 20 questions.  On the 24th attempt, the machine finally ventured a guess.  It didn’t get “Constitution” but the answer was still intriguing.

The item the machine guessed was “a receipt.”  Professor Klugman urged me to share this with the blog, noting he thought the answer was surprisingly intellectual.  In many ways the Constitution is a receipt for our democracy.

So here’s the question:

If you heard on the news tomorrow that Ira Carmen were arrested, what crime would you be most likely to assume he committed?

Have fun with it.

At the core of the position of Chancellor and President are the following roles:  the public face, the fundraiser, the community leader, the provider of values and vision, and the public servant.  White and Herman can no longer effectively play these roles.  Both have violated the public trust, forever tainted their own integrity, diminished their effectiveness as fundraisers, embarrassed themselves and the university, and enraged lawmakers in Springfield who are now less likely to fund us (with the added excuse of not wanting to pay inflated salaries of these jokers).  There is no question that White and Herman cannot provide the people of Illinois with the best possible leadership of the University of Illinois. This is the most important criteria the BoT and Pat Quinn should use when determining whether White and Herman should be retained.

Although anytime any leader of a bureaucracy the size of the University of Illinois is replaced there will necessarily be a transition period, here the resulting administrative hiccup would be much less damaging than retaining Richard Herman and B. Joe White.  White and Herman aren’t exactly steering the boat alone.  The University has an ever-expanding  army of senior administrative personnel who can keep the wheels going round even if we had to name an Interim-President and Interim-Chancellor tomorrow.

White and Herman have lost the public confidence.  They are forever diminished within the community, within the University, within the state, and within the academy.  Had the vote not been postponed, there was a strong probability that the U of I faculty-student senate would have recommended the removal of White and Herman.  The students and faculty are the heart and soul of a University, not the bureaucrats and administrators.   The U of I is a public institution committed to shared governance, which operates best when students, faculty, and administrators work together and respect one another.  White and Herman have irreparably lost the confidence of a large number of students, faculty members and alumni.  In difficult financial times, they’ve given too many alumni another reason not to give back.

At a world class research institution, and the flagship public institution in Illinois, we have a huge pool of talent to choose from to replace Herman and White, many of whom could hit the ground running on day one.  Just to illustrate some of the possibilities, I compiled a list of names from several friends who are former student leaders of folks who would do a good job as  either President or Chancellor on an interim or permanent basis:

Stan Ikenberry

Jim Edgar

Stan Levy

Ruth Watkins

Bruce Smith

Vernon Burton

Mrinalini Rao

John D. Wiley

Peg Rawls

William Berry

Al Bowman

Glen Poshard

These are just a few off the cuff suggestions from former student leaders.  Please feel free to suggest others in the comments.  Imagine the list of names a committee of current faculty and student leaders could generate in a few hours.   Without the crippling weight of the clout scandal any number of individuals could serve the University more effectively than White and Herman.  Their weakness is apparent without even addressing the other reasons to doubt White’s basic competency, Herman’s commitment to any values whatsoever, or the prowess of either as a fundraiser.

White and Herman seem to think they are entitled to a chance to right this wrong, and they plead ignorance to the overt corruption that smoking-gun emails prove they actively engaged in.  Both have been duplicitous as hell in their public statements, before they realized just how demonstrable their involvement would become to the public.  It isn’t in the best interest of the people of Illinois to give these two another chance after they displayed such an abhorrent lack of respect for public integrity. This wasn’t a mistake, it was a clear lack of character.  This shouldn’t be about whether they deserve a second chance or a chance to make things right, as Herman contends.  This should be about one thing, and one thing only: what best serves the interests of the people of Illinois.  The answer to that question is showing both Richard Herman and B. Joe White the door.

Consider the set back DADT posed to the Clinton Administration, and how it compromised health care reform.  I’m sure Rahmbo has. Despite an evolution on DADT in the public mind, moving the issue to the forefront will undermine Obama’s efforts to extend affordable health care to all Americans.

I submit that more gays are harmed by the lack of health insurance than by DADT.  And more gays are harmed by the global financial crisis than DADT.  These are broad American problems that are too important to allow distractions from any narrow activista interest group.

You can’t expect smart progressives to take up polarizing fights on issues effecting a small subset of Americans at the expense of possibly losing political wars of paramount national importance. Be patient.

Brian, it’s still early in the Obama presidency.  Don’t get angry yet.  There will be time to hold him accountable.  Timing is everything.   Imagine you’re a senior White House advisor.  When would you tell him to take up the issue if your interest was serving the American people and President Obama instead of just the LGBT community?  I’d like to see him take this issue up right after the 2010 election, preferably in a lame duck session.

A Tribune investigation which included FOIA requests uncovered hard, damning evidence that the U of I is admitting unqualified students, while turning away qualified students.  The Trib cites a clout list of over 160 students, but even one student getting special treatment is too many.

Leading a state university is a position of public trust.  Administrators have a duty to use basic fairness and equality when admitting students.  Richard Herman and B. Joe White are accountable to all the people of Illinois–to all taxpayers–not just the ones with clout.  Imagine if they were outright selling admission to our competitive law school or business school–trading a seat in the class for an envelope of cash.  In truth, trading for political influence isn’t altogether different.  Especially when those they are catering to are the same people who set their over-inflated salaries.

While it’s true this practice predates the current administration, it doesn’t excuse our leaders from compromising their principle and tarnishing the integrity of the institution.  Whether or not we traded clout for admission in the past, the practice is wrong and must stop.  Whether or not other schools do it to, the practice is wrong and must stop.

If Richard Herman and B. Joe White were men of character they would acknowledge that they owe an apology and an explanation to all of the rejected students with credentials superior to the “Category I” admittees.

But what do they get instead:

From Richard Herman, we get outright lies, excuses and obfuscation.  And he makes two contradictory arguments:

Herman said Category I applicants may have a higher rate of admission “simply because we have more information” about them.  “We are a public institution and I think we have to answer to the state and that means those who support us perhaps through their elected representative, the board who is our governing body, and all the parents who call me up. I feel I have to be able to respond,” he said.

First, Category I applicants are admitted “simply because we have more information.”  This is obviously bullshit.  In the majority of cases, the only new information is someone with money or power wants the student admitted.  That is wholly irrelevant to the young man or woman’s qualifications for admission to the University of Illinois.

Second, which is essentially, the state supports us so we have to trade political favors in exchange for state support.  His constituency is the people of Illinois, not just the Illinois General Assembly or the the members of the Board of Trustees. Shutting down “Category I” won’t shut down state support, it will just make things fair.  And I would love to hear his argument why turning down requests of members of the board, members who have a fiduciary duty to the institution, will harm the institution.

As I mentioned, his second argument contradicts his first: Arg 2: we admit these students as a political favor, Arg 1: they are simply admitted because we have more information about the candidate.

From B. Joe White we have the hugely wasteful Global Campus, an initiative that has enraged faculty members while wasting tens of millions of dollars of resources.  It was a failure of vision, a failure to recognize we were late to the market, and a stubborn refusal to live with that reality on White’s part that cost the University so dearly.

Subsequently, White embarassed the University by botching a political speech issue.

President White is trying to pass the buck instead of accepting responsibility.  And he’s hiding behind the same absurd “more information” argument Herman uses.

President White said it’s not unusual for selective universities to receive input on applicants from interested parties, and it’s important to have a system to track the requests. The additional information can help the admissions office make a more informed decision.”

White is outright lying on the radio when he claims political pressure is not leading to “jumping the que” by less qualified students.  Too late, the Trib busted you.  White argues “we do not admit strictly on the numbers” and he cites legitimate factors like grade trends, overcoming adversity, etc.  However, a name being forwarded by a board members or a political official is not a legitimate factor. He was enabling the process, and his mendacity on the radio is shameful.

Today is a disappointing day for the University of Illinois, and a day where we should all be ashamed of our leaders.  However, there are some encouraging elements, like the courage shown by admissions officers who push back against unethical pressures, all while knowing that Richard Herman is a feckless authoritarian who hates to be disagreed with almost as much as he hates bad publicity.  Also, White’s promise that the practice will be corrected is encouraging, but like everything else he says, I’m not confident we can take him at his word.

I reject the notion that the University has to have a special process for “Category I” students.  If the purpose is just “tracking” then have someone in a clerical role share data with interested parties, instead of someone with decision making power who is likely to be influenced.  I do wonder if there are any privacy concerns with releasing the status of an applicant to a third party, but that is an issue for another day.

UPDATE: For those of you who are not on the University’s mailing list, I have posted Chancellor Herman’s response to the Tribune’s article. It is a rather weak response that makes little substantive or potent defense of his words or admissions habits.

On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 2:13 PM, Chancellor Richard Herman <chancellor@illinois.edu> wrote:

Dear Campus Community

I am writing you to respond to today’s story in the Chicago Tribune
regarding admissions policies at Illinois.

Let me state at the outset that I have full confidence in our Office of
Undergraduate Admissions and its professional and dedicated staff led by
Associate Provost Keith Marshall and Director Stacey Kostell. The
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign has an admissions process based
on integrity and fairness, one that produces an incoming class that ranks
among the best academically in the nation. Our graduates go on to do great
work in the world and, in turn, they reward us through their support and
loyalty as Illinois alumni.

It is no secret that competition for admission at Illinois is stiff.
Thousands of people contact University administrators and others with ties
to the university every year in regard to the admissions process – 2,300
calls alone are received by the admissions office on the first decision
day. This year, the university received 26,000 applications for only about
7,000 seats in the incoming class. For the Class of 2013, the average ACT
score was 28 and the average high school class rank was in the 88th
percentile. We are proud of this tradition of academic quality.

As a land grant university we remain committed to be inclusive and
accessible in our pursuit of academic excellence. We seek to represent as
closely as we can the full demographic of the state. With that in mind, we
will continue to look at academic qualifications and other pertinent
information included in each application while asking whether we believe
the student will succeed at our university.

Admissions is not a science. However, we welcome the challenge the Tribune
story presents to make every possible effort to ensure the integrity our
admissions process.

But given our high retention rate and the many successes of our graduates,
we believe we mostly get it right.

Richard Herman
Chancellor

Here with his permission, I would like to share the words of my friend and mentor, Dr. Stan Levy, former Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs, who worked closely with Chancellor Cribbet when he led our University:

Today’s e-mail brought the news of the passing of   Chancellor Emeritus and Professor Emeritus John Cribbet.  He had been ill for quite some time.

John was a prince of a person, a one of a kind Illinois original.  Distinguished scholar, teacher, college dean and administrator.  community-minded for both the University and Champaign Urbana communities.  Before it was reorganized the Senate Committee

on Student Discipline was totally college deans, and the junior dean was ‘honored’ in serving as its chair.  John received this assignment during some of the most difficult days at UIUC.   When Bill Gerberding elected to leave the Chancellor’s post after only 18 months on the job, John was asked, almost dragooned, into serving first as Acting Chancellor and then as Chancellor at a time when the University was under great stress, athletic issues and significant budget stresses especially.  John distinguished himself in many ways. In the dark days of his tenure, and there were many, he was the ‘cheerleader’ who always saw the silver lining.  He was always upbeat.  His love for the University; his respect for faculty; his gracious way of dealing with his staff; his respect for the young leaders of the community, students, were always present.  His stories – and his speeches – were always insightful and memorable.  His words were always his own; he wrote his own materials.  And then there were his stories:  Ponca City, General Patton, etc., a small array woven into amazing contexts. He was a craftsman of the first rank in his use of language.

He was a terrific leader, a superb boss, a confidant, a good friend, and amazing supporter of what we sought to do in Student Affairs.  He was a gentleman at every turn and time.  His five years as Chancellor helped to change the face of the Campus.  It was a distinct personal pleasure, and constant learning experience to work for John.

May he rest in peace.

A service will be held at 2 p.m. Saturday in Rowe Auditorium at the College of Law.

Thanks to One Jones Brother for telling me to check him out.

While on vacation in Florida, I spotted this casket company truck and found its note of caution curiously self-defeating.  Maybe it’s a testament to the strength of the Batesville Casket Company: “Go ahead, take your time.  We can wait.”  Maybe their Florida customer base is so old they figure it wont make much difference.  I’d like to think Batesville Casket Company operates one county over, and they want to promote defensive driving until the enter the local market, then they will paint over “Please Drive Safely” with “Time is Running Out!” or “You Haven’t Got All Day!”