Lets try and look at the Bruce Benson nomination fairly rather than through the prism of partisan bickering, faculty conceit, and Cindy Carlisle's political positioning. (Fat chance we have of overcoming three such powerful forces.)
First off, the true job description of a University president has changed radically over the last 30 years. Faculty especially seem reticent to acknowledge this change - but the change has occurred. The primary job of the president is fund-raising, both from the legislature and from donors. And on this criteria Bruce Benson is well qualified.
The second job priority is the football team. Now I am in full agreement that the football team should be a small adjunct of the university. But in practice to many the university is a football team that also has something going on on the side having to do with education. The point remains, the athletic football department takes a lot of the president's time. How will Bruce do on this? Totally unknown.
The third (and final) main priority for a university president is student drinking. This is a gigantic problem and there is, at present, no know solution. (I think we would see an improvement is we brought back 3.2 beer as it funneled most college drinkers into very weak alcohol.) How will Bruce do on this? Again unknown although his answer to his early drinking leads me to be hopeful that he understands not only the problem, but how difficult it is to get college age kids to make intelligent decisions on this issue.
That's the job. A university president does not lead the school's research effort. He does not lead it's teaching effort. There aren't enough hours in the day to do the above plus lead the school itself. And it would be a very rare person who's skills span that gamut.
I think a lot of the faculty bitching is not that they want someone with the research skills that a PhD connotes, but that they want someone who pays due deference to the doctoral elite because they too are a member of it. As long as the president respects and understands the effort that goes in to both research and teaching, the PhD itself is unnecessary. Bruce Benson in his efforts over the years clearly does respect and understand this activity. He meets this qualification.
Now lets look at a couple of hot button items that have nothing to do with Bruce Benson, but instead are 100% the responsibility of the Regents.
There was 1 finalist. Bruce had nothing to do with that decision, that was the Board of Regents deciding that Bruce Benson was the only candidate they wished to move forward. It's reasonable and legit to get upset with the regents over this - but it is not a reflection on Bruce Benson as a candidate or his fitness for the job.
He's a Republican. First off, the university faculty and administration is so heavily Democratic that if Bruce Benson becomes the University president - it will still be heavily Democratic. Second, a political litmus test is anathema to the concept of academia being open to all ideas. Anyone saying Bruce Benson is not acceptable for being a Republican should be ashamed of themselves.
Cindy Carlisle "recently discovered" that there were two other qualified candidates. Maybe so although I am suspicious of anything Cindy says right now. But again, Bruce Benson had noting to do with how incompetently the Board of Regents handled the search process.
Evaluating Bruce Benson
So lets evaluate him on the issues that matter. The issues that are relevant to the job.
- Have him discuss how he will approach fund-raising. Yes he should be superb at it - but lets ask.
- Have him discuss his view of the importance of the football team. We need a president that will put the safety of the female students and the academic efforts of the school ahead of the success of the football team.
- Ask him for his ideas on minimizing student drinking. Don't expect a solution as there does not appear to be one, but look for thoughtful intelligent responses.
- Dig in on the specifics of his views on academic freedom and his approach to making the school a supportive academic environment. While this is not in his primary job description, it is an important issue that deserves attention.
- Sure talk to him about where he thinks energy research should be focused. It's a major issue and he is an oil & gas man. But the only part of this discussion that bears on this job is would he exert significant effort to steer the research in any specific direction. And even if that direction is renewable energy - that's a bad sign to have the president of the university attempting to influence the direction of specific research.
I don't know if Bruce Benson should be the next president of C.U. Almost all of the focus has been on issues that have nothing to do with his qualifications for the job and therefore we don't have answers to the above issues.
I would like to see the pertinent questions asked and answered.
