To the Board of Trustees of Purdue University:

The reaction to the news that Mitch Daniels will become Purdue’s next president has been mixed, to say the least, and understandably so—no standing governor or high-level politician has ever been appointed to a major university’s highest office while serving out the remainder of his term. While politics and academia can never be fully separated, it is a slap in the face to half of your students, faculty, employees, and alumni to appoint a political figure during such a fractured time in our country’s political discourse.

This decision reveals a number of biases on your part, or perhaps you simply no longer care about appearances, which is far more troubling. Didn’t Mr. Daniels appoint or confirm a majority of the trustees on this Board? His administration’s policies and decisions have made mountains of trouble for the presidents of all state universities in Indiana, including President Córdova at Purdue—isn’t that also a conflict of interest, to dirty the floor and then come knocking with a broom for sale?

Further, Mr. Daniels promoted Western Governors University, an online diploma mill, and insisted that more and more Ivy Tech credits be transferrable to Indiana universities. Now, some Ivy Tech courses are outsourced to online instructors outside the state. These are just two decisions among many which have already damaged the quality of higher education—not just at Purdue, but around Indiana.

Purdue has been an enormous part of my identity for nearly twenty years. I met my wife in its classrooms, learned the tools of my trade from the inspiring and dedicated professors in the College of Liberal Arts, and became an engaged citizen while there. With this hiring decision, you have forced me to evaluate my core principles as an educator and citizen. As such, I can no longer donate money to the university, by any means, directly or indirectly; I can no longer participate in any spectator-related university activity in person or via television; I cannot even step foot on campus, unless it is to honor in person one of the excellent educators I mentioned above, without feeling the sting of this decision. In short, I can no longer support the university. My Purdue clothing will be boxed up or donated, even if it means I have to walk around naked.

When Mr. Daniels finally steps down from this position—or if, mercy upon us, you decide to change course tomorrow and do not appoint him—I will reevaluate my decision. Until then, I am saddened to think of the fundraising brick my wife and I purchased and engraved with our names and year of graduation, which can be found at the north end of Ross-Ade Stadium, a place where we communed every time we attended a home football game. Or perhaps my lament is just a sentimental feeling for another time, one that slips ever away from us, when I could sing “Hail Purdue” and stand behind words like “ever grateful, ever true,” content that the university would honor that faith and devotion.

Sincerely,

Andrew Scott

Postscript:

A Facebook friend considers this move a break in my “faith and devotion” to Purdue. I responded:

My politics will never likely align with those of university presidents. But to choose an active politician—not even someone a few years removed from office, but a man who will still be the governor of the state for six more months, who just a few weeks ago was still being talked about as a potential VP candidate—is itself a highly politicized move, one that, like it or not, will upset a sizable portion of the greater Purdue community. 

I think Daniels has been bad for higher education, and I object to many of his other moves. But he’s not the king of evil, and I’m not trying to demonize him. I’m glad he’s not really a social conservative, and I am incredibly happy he cleaned up the BMV. But this smells bad, doesn’t it? 

Again, it has little to do with my own politics, ultimately. When a university becomes an obviously politicized place and is led by someone with a clear agenda above and beyond the singular best interests of a university community, then what you find is trouble of all kinds. On his own wall, Kevin said that most of the people objecting to this hire are educators. How can anyone affiliated with Purdue University, though, look at Daniels’s track record regarding higher education and be excited about the future? Several articles have pointed to his own education as proof that he has an academic background—not that he’s taught, or worked with students in some capacity, or even led a department, college, school, or whatever. Just that he went to college. That’s enough for some people, apparently. 

I worry, though, that the “team” mentality in American politics, which is reinforced by the false dichotomy of the two-party system, keeps individuals from honestly assessing decisions like this. Just as in the 2000 Presidential race, when the governor of the disputed state just happened to be the brother of one of the candidates, this selection process is tainted, at the very least, and likely even corrupt. A certain amount of disillusionment must follow something like this, albeit on a much smaller scale.