The faculty at Southern Methodist University has been less than enthusiastic about news that the school may host the George W. Bush Presidential Library and its accompanying museum and public policy institute. At first, some liberal faculty members at the Dallas school were opposed to SMU hosting any part of the proposed $200 million facility, but many of those have more recently said they are concerned only with the institute.
Coverage of the faculty's objections originally centered on a Nov. 10 opinion published in the Daily Campus, SMU's student newspaper, in which two professors argued that the library would associate SMU with a president who unnecessarily took the country to war. The university will ultimately regret hosting a library commemorating a president whose policies are immoral and veiled in secrecy, argued William McElvaney, professor emeritus of teaching and worship, and Susanne Johnson, associate professor of Christian education.
"Unless the Bush library philosophy is radically different from the already proven track record of insolation (sic), the library will be little more than a center for the preservation and protection of privileged presidential papers. What would that mean for academic integrity based on open inquiry?" McElvaney and Johnson wrote.
That opinion ignited much of the debate surrounding the location of the Bush library at SMU, but the current nature of professors' objections is much more nuanced, said SMU Faculty Senate President Rhonda Blair, a professor of theater. "There are substantial concerns about the institutae and its relationship to the university, but different faculty have different concerns and different ideas about what the appropriate solution is," she told The Herald.
According to Blair, faculty members largely agree that the library would be a helpful resource for the university. "I think that the library will be a great benefit and will be important because of its being a repository for significant historical records about a time in our history that's been full of change," she said.
Even McElvaney and Johnson have now said they support hosting the library at SMU, First Lady Laura Bush's alma mater, but they still oppose the public policy institute.
In a Jan. 24 closed-door faculty meeting, professors questioned whether the library's institute might threaten SMU's reputation, citing a lack of university oversight for the institute and the fact that its research agenda will be determined by Bush himself, professors who attended the meeting told the Associated Press.
Several professors, including Blair, have said the institute sounds like a think tank, and some have expressed concern that the institute might give the impression that SMU is aligned with a particular political ideology.
"Some faculty say we need to have oversight so that we can have control - some faculty say we don't want oversight so we don't have to be associated with (the institute)," Blair told The Herald. "In terms of our politics and positions, we're a very diverse faculty, which is one reason why the dialogue has been so rich."
A group of 170 professors will submit a petition against the institute to the faculty senate next week, Blair said, though she couldn't predict what, if any, action that body might take. In fact, there might be little professors can do to stop the institute from coming. The decision ultimately rests with the school's administration and its president, R. Gerald Turner, has strongly supported bringing the Bush facilities to SMU.
"It's all or nothing," Turner told the AP, referring to some professors' position that SMU should accept the library but not the institute. "The question is, does the asset outweigh what you consider the liabilities? I think it does."
Blair said she believes SMU's president will take faculty concerns into account. "I know he's put a great deal of thought into this. We've had a number of meetings listening to comments, responding to questions," Blair said. "It's a process, and (Turner) is taking it all in."
Among students, there is generally support for both the library and public policy institute, said Evan Farrior, a sophomore. "I'd say most of the students are in favor of the library just based on the number of Bush bumper stickers I see on cars around here," Farrior said. "If you support Bush, I can't imagine you would be against having a Bush institute at your school."
Farrior added that while most students are in favor of the library, "those who are opposed are vehemently opposed."
For his part, Farrior hopes SMU's administration and the White House agree to build only the library and not the think tank. "I don't want SMU to become 'the Bush School.' The institute politically links us much more to the current administration's ideology than the library would," he said.
If SMU decides not to sponsor the Bush library, it wouldn't be the first time a university has refused to host a presidential library because of the official's actions while in office. Duke University refused to host a library for President Nixon, a Duke law school graduate, because of similar concerns about associating an educational institution with a controversial presidency.
A final decision on where the Bush library will be located is expected within the next several months. If SMU fails to agree on specifics with the president, the library will be located at Baylor University in Waco, Texas.
