Written by Elizabeth Tiemann
With Election Day fast approaching on Nov. 8, The Catalyst has taken a look inward—towards the upholders of our school, our Board of Trustees and their political positions. While not publicized, the trustees’ political stances may be inferred from their individual contributions to political committees, which may be accessed online on the Federal Election Commission government database. The political contributions of the three highest-ranking trustees on the board were investigated and student responses about the implications of these donations were sought.
In 1998, Eben S. Moulton ‘68, Chair of the Board of Trustees, donated $1,000 to Republican John Kasich’s campaign. In 2008, he contributed $2,000 to Democrat Mark Udall’s campaign for one of Colorado’s senatorial seats. Udall went on to win a seat that year and served from 2009 to 2015.
Philip A. Swan ’84, Vice-Chair, has an extended record of donations in support of John Kerry for President, Republican National Committee of Los Angeles, Norm Coleman for Senate, Hillary for America, Republicans for Choice, Rudy Giuliani Presidential Committee, Carly Fiorina for California, Bush-Cheney ‘04, John McCain ‘08 and the Republican National Committee. This election year he has donated to Kasich for America and Hillary for America.
Susan Burghart ’77, Secretary of the Board, donated to two campaigns—the Democratic National Committee and the Obama Victory Fund.
Senior Abram Mamet, a Political Science major, said of his initial reaction to these findings that, “I am surprised, and heartened, that these donations seem to be irrespective of party politics.”
Senior Michael Greenberger, also a Political Science major added, “I’m pleasantly surprised that a couple of the trustees seem to donate money across party lines—to me that suggests that they are making thoughtful decisions about the political candidates they choose to support.”
He continued, “Of course this could also be read as a strategic move, the trustees seem to be donating money to candidates who have seemed most likely to win.”
First-year Tom Bugg when presented with the findings commented, “Obviously I believe each board member has the right to support the candidate or party of their choice through their donations. My initial reaction was neutral; I was pleased to see that, based on the campaigns listed, the board members as a collective have no obvious partisan leaning.”
First-year Spencer Janney said, “Everybody has their own political views and affiliations and the views of the Trustees seem fairly diverse.”
When prompted with the question of whether political alignments affect school policy and decision making by the trustees, Greenberger said, “The variation of candidates and parties that the Trustees support suggests a willingness to compromise as much as it suggests a lack of strong political convictions.”
Bugg also echoed Greenberger’s comment, “The board’s political plurality is reassuring to me that political views do not influence the running of the school in any significant way, since there is no apparent pattern of political alignment among the board members.” Janney said, “I think that no one person on the board has enough power to have their views affect the running of the school.”
In terms of how political alignment might affect school business, Mamet explained, “The only way that political alignments influence school business is in federal funding. A large portion of our school’s partial-pay or full-ride students receive federal funding – we have to have policy that aligns with federal policy, or else we as a school would be unable to accept the federal money that pays for so many kids to go to school here. [For example] the school can’t allow students to smoke marijuana even though it’s legal in Colorado, since it would put our federal money in jeopardy.”
Greenberger said that, “The worldviews that inform those political alignments certainly affects the decisions that the trustees make. For example, a trustee who aligns more closely with the Democratic Party may be more sympathetic to the divestment campaigns of student groups that reflects Democratic Party policies, i.e divestment from fossil fuels.”
Sophomore Annie Bronfman chose to highlight the affects of the majority-democratic political alignment of the student body at CC.
“We are on a campus with a primarily Democrat student body,” said Bronfman. “The conservative students have a small voice at CC, which feels almost completely silent during an election year when the liberal students band together to vocalize their concerns. I’m a Democrat myself, but I often feel like our campus is overwhelmingly biased. It doesn’t mean as much when liberals are yelling at liberals who agree with them.”