Posted: Wednesday, December 12, 2007 12:00 am
In the latest flap over university students and free speech, there is a claim that it is conservative speech which is threatened at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. Liberals may gloat a bit because two years ago it was they who were in the crosshairs over a speech in Whitewater by a controversial Colorado professor.
The fundamental principle at stake supersedes political ideology, however, and both sides should unite on this issue. Conservatives have a point - not the whole point extending to the left-wing conspiracy claimed by one Republican senator - but enough of a point that there should be some serious reconsideration of UW System policy.
This past weekend, UW-Madison officials said they would meet with University of Wisconsin College Republicans about a $1,293 bill from the university police. It was for extra security at an October speech by neoconservative David Horowitz. It was a large sum for a student group, the university admitted, and said security fees are charged at the discretion of police. A member of the College Republicans said the group had received a few e-mail threats before the Horowitz visit.
But fees are not equally applied. The UW-Milwaukee recently lowered its fees for the visit of a self-described former terrorist. Colorado Professor Ward Churchill came to UW-Whitewater in 2005 to talk about his essay saying that people killed in the World Trade Center attack helped advance practices which inspired the attack. His speaking fee of $4,000 and security costs of $6,049 were covered by donations and fees from the two student groups which invited him. A review by the Wisconsin State Journal of 10 years of UW-Madison security charges found that 46 groups have been charged, including about $2,600 for liberal events, $8,700 for conservative events, $10,700 for apolitical or bipartisan events, and $4,900 for unclassified events. And leaving the billing up to police does give them the opportunity to discourage certain groups from inviting certain people.
Universities are intended to be places where people are exposed to new ideas. Sometimes those ideas are distasteful, as in the case of Churchill or Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who appeared at Columbia University, yet these ideas need to be heard. It is our constitutional principle that people be able to speak their minds, and there is a solid practical reason behind that principle: Ideas look different in the strong light of free debate. Stupid ideas wilt; good ones grow. That's why so many nations - Iran, for example - have regimes which stifle free speech. They fear the wilting of the ideas which provide their power.
A solution to the university dilemma lies in a simple policy change: the UW System should end extra security charges for speakers who come at the invitation of a university or its affiliated student groups. Perhaps there should be an extra student fee to help build a pool of money for extra security, but a total of about $27,000 in 10 years is a pittance which the system could easily cover on its own. It would be a very small price for advancing the principle of free speech on which universities are built.