Restrictions on data collection would stifle academic freedom

The public debate about Proposition 54, the initiative to ban
the collection of data identifying race, ethnicity or national
origin, is missing one of the most damaging features of this
initiative. Proposition 54 will give politicians the authority to
tell the faculty of the University of California what data they can
and cannot collect in the course of their teaching and research.
Proposition 54 is a direct threat to academic freedom, which, as
stated by the American Association of University Professors, is
““ “the free search for truth and its free
exposition.”

Since 1879, the California Constitution has required the UC to
“be entirely independent of all political and sectarian
influence.” The UC’s constitutional independence is a
key reason why it has been among the nation’s most successful
universities, allowing the pursuit of life-altering research free
from state-imposed restrictions. Proposition 54 could result in
major political intrusion into the process of free and open
inquiry.

The drafters of Proposition 54 made a huge mistake. Hoping to
avoid criticism that their initiative would restrict advances in
medicine, they exempted medical research. But this narrow exemption
does more harm than good. By specifically exempting one academic
discipline, the language will most likely be construed by courts as
subjecting every other kind of research to Proposition 54’s
limitations.

With such a ruling, researchers in public health, history,
anthropology, sociology, political science ““ you name it
““ could no longer collect data about racial, ethnic or
national origins, no matter how central the data is to their
research. For example, a historian studying California immigrants
could not collect data on the national origins of those who
populated the state.

The initiative’s sponsors say this is not such a problem
because the initiative allows exceptions that “serve a
compelling state interest” to be approved by two-thirds of
both houses of the Legislature and the governor. But this is the
crux of the matter. The Legislature, rather than the university is
given the authority to decide what kind of research can be
conducted. In essence, this eviscerates the 1879 constitutional
protection of the university from political interference. Faculty
could be compelled to submit research proposals to some legislative
agency that would determine whether or not the research serves
“a compelling state interest.”

UC faculty would be at a competitive disadvantage because such
research would be allowed in the state’s private universities
and in public and private universities throughout the United States
and the world. Only UC and Cal State faculty would be subject to
this political litmus test on the data they could collect.

No matter what one’s position is on the issues surrounding
race, ethnicity and affirmative action, everyone needs to realize
that Proposition 54 sets an extremely damaging precedent by
limiting the academic freedom of the UC faculty. The California
Constitution gave the UC regents “full powers of organization
and government” for the university to ensure free and
unfettered inquiry in the pursuit of knowledge. Proposition 54
would be a serious erosion of the university’s academic
independence.

Greenspan is Coordinator of Educational Relations in the UC
Office of the President. The views in this article represent his
individual opinions, and not necessarily those of the
UCOP.