A memo from university president Peter Likins outlining what kind of political activity faculty can engage in as UA employees has confused and angered many professors who said it could stifle political debate on campus.

The memo, titled "Thoughts for the Political Season," sent to faculty last month, stated that in order to avoid jeopardizing state and federal funding of the university, employees cannot be perceived to be representing the university.

While some professors said the memo seems appropriate at a time of heightened political tensions, others question the true intentions of the memo, calling its language too vague to allow for comfortable teaching and hypocritical of a university president who isn't himself neutral.

President Likins didn't return messages left for him last week by press time.

Memo 'too vague'

The memo states that the university prohibits statements that "imply" that an employee is speaking for the university and prohibits the use of university resources, from pens to email accounts, for political activity.

Charles Smith, professor of Near Eastern Studies, said if the guidelines presented in the memo are followed, an interview he gave to NPR last semester over the phone in his office could have been deemed a violation of university policies.

"In doing that, I was expressing publicly my opinions on the Bush administration's handling of the Abu Ghraib situation," Smith said. "Even though I was getting national and international recognition for being consulted on this, the way Likins is presenting this, the only way I would be able to interview would be at home."

History professor Doug Weiner said the prohibition of engaging in political activity "during regular working hours" is strange because professors are, in a sense, always working.

"They're misunderstanding the larger mission of the university, which historically is not just a place to prepare young people to enter the workforce," Weiner said, "but also an important place where uncomfortable ideas and theories could be thought, debated, discussed and refined and discarded as the case may be."

The tone of the memo, Weiner said, inhibits that mission.

Whether or not the use of a professor's academic title in writing an Op/Ed piece for a newspaper is appropriate remains unanswered, said Weiner.

"But my academic title is a sign I'm respected by a great many of my colleagues in my field," he said. "It's a sign of my expertise."

Political science professor Paulette Kurzer wrote in an email that the failure of the public to see the difference between a professor as a private citizen and as a university employee shouldn't mean faculty members can't express their opinions as individuals.

"The issue cuts both ways," Kurzer said. "We will not involve the university in our political life, but neither should the university involve itself in our political choices even if the outside community criticizes our actions or opinions."

Profs question intent

History and political science professor David Gibbs said he's concerned the memo was written for all the wrong reasons.

Conservative students, parents and political figures who don't like hearing opinions that differ from their own are getting increasingly aggressive about the way they silence professors, Gibbs said.

Gibbs said one of his students left a shocking message on his teacher evaluation form at the end of the semester, calling him an "anti-American Communist" and stating he had been reported to the FBI.

"I don't know to what extent university administration is responding to this kind of pressure," Gibbs said. "If it is, it's a matter of concern; we're dealing with issues of academic freedom."

Smith said he's taught at a number of universities and has never seen a memo like this one. "The real question is, 'Why did Likins do it?'"

The memo might have been sent out, Smith said, in order to stifle discussion, especially criticism of President Bush during the election season.

"What he's trying to do is cut down or prevent political activity by professors on campus. He's trying to stifle legitimate debate," Smith said. "That in itself is a political act."

Inviting President Bush to speak at commencement ceremonies last May, Smith said, could also be perceived as political.

Smith said he would start conducting polls of whether or not universities in other states are issuing similar statements.

Wiener said he thinks issuing the memo at a time when the university is getting grant money to do research for Homeland Security and when the university president sits on a number of corporate boards of directors is wrong.

"There seems to be a very large dose of hypocrisy here," said Wiener.

Some fear memo will stifle campus debate

"I think the tone could have a chilling effect on one of the most important issues on campus this fall - the election," Said Gibbs. "My job is to discuss politics, especially current political action. In general there is already some degree of intimidation of faculty that criticize President Bush."

Gibbs said the provision that states the university is not allowed to "promote actions with respect to issues that are identified as dividing lines between candidates," could discourage discussion of "virtually any issue."

And that, Gibbs said, could result in boring and uninformative classes.

Weiner said it could also mean certain kinds of research, such as stem cell research, would violate university policy.

Linguistics professor Andrew Carnie wrote in an email that he thought some of the guidelines are reasonable, while others seem to threaten academic freedom.

In many classes, Carnie said, it's almost impossible for a professor to teach the issues without expressing an opinion. He said the memo implied that analyzing political thought or holding class debates could be interpreted as inappropriate.

"If this is indeed the case then the memo smacks of Orwellian oversight into the research and teaching performed at this university," Carnie said. "I hope President Likins had less intrusive goals."

Others call memo 'reasonable,' necessary

Some professors, far from seeing a problem with the memo, thought it was a needed reminder of a professor's responsibilities as an influential member of the community.

"We do risk speaking for the university whether we intend to or not," said philosophy professor David Schmidtz. "A little bit of inhibition is a mark of wisdom. As professors, our words have consequences. We do have to be very careful of what we say."

Schmidtz said he thought the memo was "perfectly reasonable."

English professor Rudolph Troike wrote in an email that, as a professor, he thinks he should avoid sharing his political views with students.

"Even in private conversations with students in my office," Troike said, "I don't present my personal views on political issues as I feel that it would be inappropriate for me to seem to be using my influence to persuade a student to support a particular political party or candidate."

As state employees, faculty members of the UA are responsible for maintaining fairness toward the public, Troike said.

"When someone accepts a position in a public institution, it is with the understanding that the public trust must be respected," Troike said. "The choice is thus there at the outset - it is not something imposed on anyone after the fact."

Kurzer said that professors take on an additional role when they're state employees.

"We have a direct stake in the outcome of certain state elections. It seems a bit disingenuous to pretend that elections do not directly have an impact on how the university fares and thus how we fare as UA staff and faculty."