Duke graduate Aubrey McClendon has donated over $6 million to Duke, and the University holds him and his wife Kathleen in extraordinarily high esteem. Whether it"s the WEL tower that was named for him, the newsletters publicizing his work or the gargoyle that was sculpted to resemble him, McClendon has been a frequent recipient of high profile thank-you"s for his commitment to academics and student life at Duke.
Now, thanks to a rather large political contribution, McClendon has put Duke in a position that its administrators almost certainly would rather not be in: honoring a man who played a major part in financing the 'Swift Vets and POWs for Truth' political advocacy group, the same group that is widely accused of derailing Sen. John Kerry"s presidential campaign through questionable tactics.
According to Federal Election Commission records, McClendon gave $250,000 to the Swift Boat Veterans Sept. 8, 2004. His contribution was the second-largest the group had received, and no doubt paid for some of the new advertisements the Swift Boat Veterans were able to run after their original one in August. The following month, prominent Duke donor Peter Nicholas contributed $500,000 to the 'Progress For America' Voter Fund, another '527' advocacy group, though it was far more pro-Bush than it was anti-Kerry.
McClendon and Nicholas"s donations raise an important question that President Richard Brodhead might want to answer before the the next U.S. presidential election rolls around: Would Duke ever reject donations from an individual based on his or her other financial activities? The question could become especially relevant in 2008, as the 527 loophole to campaign finance reform practically invites the formation of political groups who attack candidates in personal, vicious and dishonest ways.
On one hand, an all-out political litmus test for donations clearly violates basic principles of free expression and diversity. That said, I doubt many would support an "anyone and anything" donations standard, especially if the current practice of naming campus landmarks after donors continues. There would certainly be an uproar, and rightly so, were Duke to honor a prominent financial supporter of the Ku Klux Klan with a building and statue because of a large donation to the University.
In McClendon"s case, he did more than just give money to a candidate or party this election. Specifically, he handsomely funded an independent group that was attacking Kerry over his Vietnam service, claiming that Kerry, among other things, lied about being injured in combat. The group"s message was not one of opinion, but accusation.
The Swift Vet ads were widely criticized by mainstream newspapers, third parties and even some Republicans as lacking in truth. Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., called them 'dishonest and dishonorable,' while the Annenberg Political Fact Check concluded 'the veterans who accuse Kerry are contradicted by Kerry"s former crewmen, and by Navy records.' Even President George W. Bush and his campaign objected to the ads, continually claiming Kerry served honorably in Vietnam. As Vice President Dick Cheney said to lengthy applause in his convention speech: 'The President"s opponent is an experienced Senator. He speaks often of his service in Vietnam, and we honor him for it.'
The Swift Boat Veterans also have their defenders, but the accuracy of their claims is not the issue here. What is at issue is whether a Duke donor could find him or herself in a position where the University rejects donations or revokes past honors because of other financial activities. The decision seems rather easy in some cases--'no' when it comes to donating to candidates or parties, 'yes' when it comes to violent or racist groups--but more difficult in others.
Seeing that the current amount of 527 groups will likely increase before the next election and seeing that the individuals who keep the groups afloat will again be some of the same individuals who keep Duke"s endowment strong, it seems that someone should at least articulate a policy for donations and the honoring of donors. That way, it won"t seem to be driven solely by dollars.
Nathan Carleton is a Trinity senior. His column appears Thursdays.
Get The Chronicle straight to your inbox
Signup for our weekly newsletter. Cancel at any time.