Editorial
Daily Texan
November 17, 1995

After maintaining a relative silence in the dispute over the University's connection with Freeport-McMoRan and the naming of the new molecular biology building after Jim Bob Moffett, UT President Robert Berdahl purchased a full-page ad in The Daily Texan to express his position. The ad appears on page 7 of this issue.

We sympathize with President Berdahl. He is in a difficult position. Because of UT System Chancellor William Cunningham's close ties with Freeport-McMoRan and the regents' support for the naming of the Moffett building, Berdahl's position on the Moffett issue is almost compelled by his superiors. At the same time, it appears that a growing number of UT students and faculty have serious concerns about the propriety of the University's close association with McMoRan.

Caught between these two forces and compelled to defend McMoRan against growing criticism, Berdahl resorts to some weak arguments.

First, Berdahl tries to portray the University's treatment of Moffett as an issue of free speech and due process. "If the University seeks to judge and censor any members of its community, including financial contributors, for their beliefs," Berdahl writes, "we will have sacrificed our commitment to objectivity, rational discourse, and due process of law." "I hope that everyone can recognize the importance of maintaining freedom [and] due process."

One gets the image of a powerless Moffett being gagged, denied his civil liberties by those bent on silencing a helpless innocent. Nothing could be further from the truth. Moffett has ample clout in the marketplace of ideas. He isn't being censored. Freeport's views are reported both in news stories and in the full-page ads it has purchased from Austin's other daily newspaper. Furthermore, the University is not excluding McMoRan from campus. Moffett has the same free speech rights as any other citizen. In fact, given Berdahl's support and Moffett's close relationship with Chancellor Cunningham, Freeport probably has more access to the University than do most people.

Moffett is not being tried for criminal activity; his 14th Amendment rights of due process are not in jeopardy. The issue is whether the University should honor the man with a building. Being denied that honor would violate neither substantive nor procedural due process.

Second, Berdahl justifies the naming of the Moffett building on the vital "principle of institutional neutrality in any debate over what constitutes truth." Now, this is coming from the man who once publicly referred to the Young Conservatives of Texas as the "Young Crazy Texans." Regardless of whether that derogatory label can be justified, Berdahl's words hardly constitute "neutrality."

Nor is the University neutral about other political issues. It has aggressive policies of racial preferences and affirmative action. Can anyone deny that this is adopting a position on a controversial political question? Or how about when it lobbies the state Legislature?

Furthermore, naming a building after Jim Bob Moffett is not neutrality. It is an explicit endorsement of the man and the company. Naming a building after someone is one of the highest honors a university can bestow. If the original choice to name the building for Moffett did not violate neutrality, how could a contrary decision do so?

All of this is not to say that the University should have declined the money. In this age of decreased support from the Texas Legislature and the federal government, the University needs money from private donors. Berdahl is correct when he says, "To abrogate a commitment with one contributor would signal all contributors that The University cannot be relied upon to keep its word."

Because of this need to attract donors, anyone like Moffett who gives more than $3 million to the University deserves the benefit of the doubt. But the question of the University's relationship with Freeport-McMoRan must still be debated, and President Berdahl's arguments are not compelling enough to settle the issue.

-- Robert Rogers

Protesters

Want to make your conservative friends deliriously happy? Just point out that almost 10 times more students turned out on the West Mall to hear a Christian evangelist than sat in on the steps of the Main Building to denounce Freeport-McMoRan. For better or worse, student protests just aren't what they used to be.

--Robert Rogers