Objecting to the Patriot Act's possible violations of civil liberties and academic freedom, the UC Davis Academic Senate overwhelmingly approved a resolution Oct. 29 challenging any action taken on campus under the federal measure.

In the resolution, UC Davis' faculty-governing body urges the campus administration to appoint a spokesperson to respond to federal inquiries of student and faculty records under the Patriot Act. It calls for the chancellor to "take every legally protected step to challenge and resist" such inquiries and to petition Congress to support legislation that restores civil liberties.

Passed six weeks after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, the 342-page Patriot Act allows the government to tap phone lines and access medical, financial and academic records of students and faculty who exhibit suspicious behavior. Under the act, officials can also access library and bookstore records, which some members of the Academic Senate said was arbitrary and an infringement of civil liberties.

The senate voted 49 to 8 in favor of the resolution, which is based on one approved unanimously last spring by UC Berkeley's senate faculty.

The resolution noted that the Patriot Act could result in:

• secret monitoring of communications and activities of students, faculty, or staff, and wiretaps of phones;
• law enforcement's expanded access to medical, financial, and academic records of students, faculty, or staff, without meaningful oversight or judicial review, probable cause, and notification of the person whose records are being sought;
• ordering university libraries and bookstores to maintain and produce records pertaining to book usage while forbidding disclosure that such records have been requested or provided;
• the identification of domestic groups, including political and religious groups, as "terrorist organizations";
• the deportation or indefinite detention of non-citizens without charging them with a crime.

Vicki Smith, a sociology professor who brought the resolution to the floor, described the Patriot Act as "impinging on academic freedom" and going "too far, too fast" in response to the 2001 terrorist attacks. The resolution, she said, offers some protective safeguards for the university in the event requests are made of it or its employees under the Patriot Act.

"We are people who study carefully, question deeply," she said about the senate's deliberations on the issue.

Joshua Clover, a professor in English, said the investigative powers of the Patriot Act are easily misused and that it is the special responsibility of universities to preserve and advance freedom of debate and the liberties of thought.

"This resolution provides useful safeguards against some of the most invidious provisions of the Patriot Act that could force members of the university community to, in effect, inform on and keep secrets from colleagues, students, and employees," said Clover.

Joel Hass, a mathematics professor, voted against the resolution, saying it was not the job of the Academic Senate to take a stand on the Patriot Act. "I think it's politicizing this body," he said.

Kathy Stuart, a history professor, said it was necessary for the senate to adopt a position on the act. "We live in politicized times. It's an issue of the courage that goes with citizenship."

Shared governance, campaign

In other business, Chancellor Larry Vanderhoef spoke to the senate on shared governance and the upcoming comprehensive campaign.

"I think shared governance works quite well here, but I'm supportive of Dan's efforts to better engage the faculty in the governance of this university," said Vanderhoef, referring to Dan Simmons, senate chair and law professor. "At UC, shared governance means that no single campus constituency has full authority for everything that happens within the university. Final authority rests with different entities in different cases."

Vanderhoef also urged the senate to get involved in the upcoming comprehensive campaign, which currently aims to raise approximately $900 million by 2012 in support of academic programs, faculty, students and facilities.

"I hope that you will be our partners as we prepare for and launch our first comprehensive campaign. It's our time, and this is our opportunity," Vanderhoef said.

A feasibility study currently under way will guide the university in setting the final campaign goal and strategies, he added.

Vanderhoef highlighted the role that "Big Ideas" or transformational proposals might play in the university's future. These are areas of academic endeavor that UC Davis might present to donors who have the desire and the capacity to make gifts of $50 million to $75 million or $100 million.

Campaign objectives, he said, broadly include academic programs and support for students, faculty and facilities for all of the colleges and schools. He indicated that the administration has sought input on campaign priorities from vice chancellors and deans, among others.

"These campaign objectives have bubbled up from each of the units and reflect their academic planning," Vanderhoef said.

Simmons later suggested that the executive councils in the various academic units be more fully engaged in developing campaign priorities and on campus issues, especially the budget.

"This is an experiment," Simmons said. "The work we do will not be perfect, but it will move us forward. It'll be an important change."