Editorial
Daily Texan
January 31, 1996

At the Faculty Council meeting on Monday, UT President Robert Berdahl suggested that the Moffett controversy has run its course. Berdahl said that the UT community should "get on with the business of teaching students and doing research" instead of fighting over the name of the new molecular biology building.

Berdahl is correct in that the Moffett controversy has dragged on for some time. One might have expected the issue to die down after UT System Chancellor William Cunningham's resignation from the Freeport-McMoRan board of directors. That resignation removed any possible conflict of interest between Cunningham and Moffett and cut many UT ties with Freeport.

Yet a major reason the fight over the naming of the Moffett building has continued is that Freeport threatened to sue UT professors who had criticized it. As long as Freeport is attacking the academic freedom of the UT community, the faculty protests over naming a building for Moffett will continue. The faculty are understandably concerned when the regents propose to honor a man who has attacked professors' academic freedom and free speech rights.

Ironically, Berdahl brushed over this cause by dismissing the legal threats. Berdahl claimed that Freeport's letters were not attempts to silence the faculty. "There is no lawsuit at this point," he said.

Well, no. There isn't a lawsuit, if only because Freeport lacks a legal case against the professors. But the mere absence of a lawsuit does not mean that Freeport has not tried to silence the faculty. Berdahl is blatantly wrong in suggesting that Freeport's threats to sue UT professors are not meant to intimidate and silence.

As long as Freeport threatens the faculty, controversy over the Moffett building will continue. Until Moffett respects the faculty's academic freedom, this controversy will continue to embroil the University.

-- Robert Rogers