Two Scandals, One Connection: The FBI Link Between Penn State and UC Davis
Two shocking scandals. Two esteemed universities. Two disgraced
university leaders. One stunning connection. Over the last month, we’ve
seen Penn State University President Graham Spanier dismissed from his
duties and we’ve seen UC Davis Chancellor Linda Katehi pushed to the
brink of resignation.
Spanier was jettisoned because of what appears to
be a systematic cover-up of assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky’s
serial child rape.
The names Spanier and Katehi are now synonymous
with the worst abuses of institutional power. But their connection
didn’t begin there. In 2010,
Spanier chose Katehi to join an elite team
of twenty college presidents on what’s called the National Security
Higher Education Advisory Board, which “promotes discussion and outreach
between research universities and the FBI.”
Spanier said upon the group’s founding in 2005,
“The National Security Higher Education Advisory Board promises to help
universities and government work toward a balanced and rational
approach that will allow scientific research and education to progress
and our nation to remain safe.” He also said that the partnership could
help provide “internships” to faculty and students interested in
“National Security issues.”
FBI chief Robert Mueller said at a press conference with Spanier,
“We knew it would not be necessarily an easy sell because of the
perceived tension between law enforcement and academia. But once we’ve
briefed President Spanier on the national security threats that impact
all of you here at Penn State and at other universities, it became clear
to all of us why this partnership is so important. “
But the reality of this partnership is far different. Its original
mandate was about protecting schools from “cyber theft” and
“intellectual property issues.” As has been true with the FBI since
Hoover, give them a foothold, and they’ll take off their shoes and get
cozy. Their classified mandate has since expanded to such euphemisms as
“counter-terrorism” and “public safety.” It also expanded federal
anti-terrorism task forces to include the dark-helmeted pepper-spray
brigades, otherwise known as the campus police.
As Wired magazine put it in 2007,
“presidents are being advised to think like ‘Cold Warriors’ and be
mindful of professors and students who may not be on campus for purposes
of learning but, instead, for spying, stealing research and recruiting
people who are sympathetic to an anti-U.S. cause.”
Chancellor Katehi said in 2010 that despite these concerns, she was proud to join the NSHEA because
“it’s important for us to learn from the FBI about the smartest, safest
protocols to follow as we do our work, and it is equally important that
the FBI has a solid understanding of matters of academic freedom.”
Sacremento’s FBI special agent in Charge, Drew Parenti, praised her involvement, saying,
“The FBI’s partnership with higher education is a key component in our
strategy of staying ahead of national security threats from our foreign
adversaries…. we are very pleased that Chancellor Katehi has accepted an
appointment to serve on the board.”
As for the actual meetings between the presidents of academic
institutions and the FBI, those discussions are classified. If you are a
rabble-rousing faculty member or a student group stepping out of line,
your school records can become the FBI’s business and you’d be none the
wiser.
Chris Ott, from the Massachusetts ACLU, said of the NSHEA,
“The FBI is asking university faculty, staff, and students to create a
form of neighborhood watch against anything that is so called
‘suspicious.’ What kinds of things are they going to report on? Who has
the right to be snitching? One of the scary things is who [on the
campuses] will take it upon themselves to root out spies?”
In the wake of the scandals that have enveloped and now destroyed the
careers of Spanier and Katehi, the very existence of the NCHEA should
now be called to question. Given the personal character on display by
these two individuals, why should anyone trust that the classified
meetings have stayed in the realm of “cyber theft” and intellectual
property rights? What did the FBI tell Chancellor Katehi about how to
deal with the peacefully assembled Occupiers? Was “counter-terrorism”
advice given on how to handle her own students?
As for Spanier, how much of Sandusky’s actions at Penn State, which
were documented on campus but never shared with the local police, was
the FBI privy to? Why did the school hire former FBI director Louis
Freeh to head up their internal investigation? Does that in fact
represent a conflict of interest? And most critically, did the
“chilling effect” of a sanctioned FBI presence at Penn State actually
prevent people from coming forward?
When Spanier was asked in 2005, if he was concerned about whether a
formal partnership with the FBI would cause objections he said, “If
there is an issue on my campus, I’d like to be the first person to hear
about it, not the last.” In
the context of recent events,
it’s probably best to let those words speak for themselves. But fear
not for the futures of these two stewards of higher education and
academic freedom. Maybe Spanier can put his experience as a federal
informant to good use from inside a federal prison.
As for Katehi, if,
as suspected, she’ll be unemployed shortly, perhaps she can take
advantage of one of those fabulous internship opportunities having the
FBI on campus provides.