rises in tuition

A coalition of student groups recently began a push for public disclosure of the University endowment's investment decisions. If they have their way, the University's financial security could be seriously jeopardized.

It should be noted that this type of endowment disclosure was among the primary goals of the "Take Back NYU" students who barricaded a New York University cafeteria in February to press their demands. Publication of the University's private endowment holdings could incite a corporate witch hunt, in which student groups presume they have the authority and financial acumen to scrutinize and micromanage the individual investment decisions of the University.

Moreover, the belief that students are entitled to know everything about Duke just by virtue of having enrolled is mistaken. Students are no more entitled to every bit of information they may want to have about the school they attend than officials of the school are entitled to know everything about them. Individuals and institutions need to be able to draw lines with respect to their relationships with others. Students can ask for information, but the University has a right to say "no."

At a time when financial stresses are forcing the University to cut back its spending on research and undergraduate activities and consider layoffs for a large portion of the University workforce, publicizing endowment figures could endanger the University's economic security and compromise Duke's competitiveness with peer institutions. The ability for Duke to provide the high level of education it does is tantamount to any other objectives, much less those that could hurt the University.

In our opinion, the call for "transparency" is especially baffling given that Duke's Advisory Committee on Investment Responsibility fully accommodates corporate social responsibility concerns. The Board of Trustees' March 2008 decision to bar the Duke University Management Company from making investments in Sudan reflects the plausibility of navigating the ACIR process. To throw out a functioning system in favor of "transparency" is to invite an anti-corporate free-for-all which would undermine the University's strategic position.

At the risk of rises in tuition, comparable reductions in financial aid initiatives and philanthropic measures and reduced University spending in general, the University should recognize its primary interests and withhold from imposing unnecessary and dangerous measures in the name of a non-existent obligation.

Jake Bullock

Chair, Duke College Republicans

Trinity '11

Cliff Satell

Co-chair, Duke Conservative Union

Trinity '11