Inauguration brings questions about Carnesale to light

Wednesday, May 13, 1998

Inauguration brings questions about Carnesale to light

CHANCELLOR: Issues remain about chancellor’s ability to become
trusted leader

By Kandea Mosley

On Friday, the chancellor of UCLA, Albert Carnesale, will
announce his vision for our university – a vision that many believe
will reflect his philosophy for higher education and the way in
which he thinks our university should be governed, and clarify the
role he intends for UCLA in the years ahead.

As one of the largest public universities in the United States,
political trends at UCLA catalyze national debates and send out
clear-cut political signals that reverberate throughout the
country. The anti-affirmative action campaign initiated by Gov.
Pete Wilson as a last gasp for a failed 1996 presidential bid spilt
over to the UC Board of Regents and led to the elimination of
affirmative action in the UC system. A voter initiative called the
California Civil Rights Initiative, otherwise referred to as
Proposition 209, created considerable confusion, as many voters
were uncertain as to whether a vote for Proposition 209 meant a
vote in support of Civil Rights Legislation or an attack against
statewide efforts to ensure equal opportunity and increased
socio-political mobility.

At the time of the first wave of broad-based attacks against
affirmative action, strong statements of support for affirmative
action were drafted by the UC President, chancellors and vice
presidents. The UC academic council published a series of
resolutions in support of affirmative action in UC policy. Students
took up the urgent need for action by organizing precinct walking
teams, voter registration drives, educational programs, forums and
rallies. At UCLA, there was a strong sense that when a call for
political mobilization and strong leadership was issued, it was the
responsibility of all those who value basic democratic and
educational rights to get active and get involved. Non-violent
protests were organized to combat feelings of political isolation
and apathy, as well as the tide of pessimism, fear and ideological
uncertainty that can cripple any fight for social justice. These
mass actions served to garner community support and solidarity with
the student struggle.

However, what we are witnessing today, virtually on the eve of
the chancellor’s inauguration, is a university caught in the grips
of an ethical crisis – and a soon to be inaugurated chancellor who
is shying away from taking an ethical stand. A university that, for
the past month, has employed an aggressive recruitment strategy,
selling UCLA diversity to students while masking the reality of
increasing racial segregation.

One of the chief methods by which Carnesale has said that he
will address the decline in admissions of students of color is
through outreach programs. Although both university and
student-initiated outreach programs are badly needed to assist high
school students as they try to succeed in a systematically
underfunded public educational system, these programs do nothing to
address the crisis in the admissions policy. The admissions policy
is the focal point of the problem at UCLA; therefore, its reform is
the only true solution. Never mind the fact that these outreach
programs aren’t expected to have any impact on admissions for at
least 10 years! What, then, in the meantime, are students supposed
to do? Are students expected to somehow accept our status as a
sacrificed generation marching into a future of political
uncertainty and stifling despair?

On April 8, at a student government council meeting, Carnesale
responded to a concerned student’s question by saying, "Some unjust
laws must be adhered to." These kinds of careless, flippant remarks
in reference to Proposition 209 call to question Carnesale’s own
political beliefs and moral commitments. As the chancellor of UCLA,
Carnesale’s power and influence extends beyond the manicured lawns
that enclose UCLA and into the domain of local, state and national
legislative bodies. As chancellor, and therefore a leader
throughout greater Los Angeles, Carnesale’s apparent indifference
to societal injustice and the disenfranchisement of "minority"
groups is an affront to the people of Los Angeles and the
educational rights we entrust him to defend. Most recently, in a
Daily Bruin submission ("Campus effort to sustain diversity
commendable," May 7), he announced his belief that "Higher
education is not a right." If Carnesale cannot even defend the
right to a higher education as outlined in California’s Master Plan
for Higher Education, how can he uphold the integrity and mission
of public education? And if he can’t uphold the integrity and the
mission of public education, how is he going to serve as chancellor
of UCLA?

As president of the Undergraduate Student Association Council, I
believe that it is my duty to bring into focus the seriousness of
this Friday’s inauguration of Albert Carnesale. Students in support
of racial justice and equality are organizing a rally Friday near
the inverted fountain at 9:30 a.m. I urge everyone to support the
Affirmative Action Coalition in its efforts to defend education as
a human right.