The California Association of Scholars (CAS) and University of California Board of Regents have exchanged two more letters to update the account presented recently of the two organizations’ negotiations over the report by the CAS on the corruption of UC by radical politics.
The purpose of a Board of Regents is to represent the public interest in the University, and to hold it accountable when it is failing the public. The present chair of the Board takes a very different view. We recommend that you read our most recent letter to her, in which we explain that her deference to UC spokesmen represents a collapse of the system of Regental oversight of the University.
In the complete file of CAS's correspondence with UC on the report with the administration, the faculty Senate, and the Regents, all three carefully avoid discussing any issue of substance that we raised, despite repeated efforts on our part to get them to do so. The correspondence with President Yudof is one long display of obfuscation and evasiveness, and in this he is followed by the faculty Senate's leadership.
Both deny again and again that anything is wrong at UC, but that assurance is undermined by their refusing to confront any issue that we raised. From this we can safely assume that UC has no answers to the charges made in the CAS report, and knows as much.
The Regents are more likely to do their duty if they know that the public is watching and expects it of them. Letters to the Regents would help to create that sense, as would your airing the question in local newspapers or talk radio. Please help. Peter Berkowitz and Lanny Ebenstein are excellent examples of writers who have addressed the Regents’ complacency.
