On Point: A diversity of diversity

Published January 24, 2007 at midnight

Text size

More Opinion Columns & Blogs

CU Chancellor Bud Peterson is an engaging fellow, so when he tells me that a high-paying new position he's creating-"vice chancellor for diversity, equity and community engagement" - won't necessarily fatten the University of Colorado bureaucracy, I naturally want to believe him.

So I throw out the obvious question: Will Peterson meantime eliminate the post of "vice provost and associate vice chancellor for diversity and equity" (readers are now free to come up for air) since those duties are being kicked upstairs?

He's not sure, he replies. It remains to be seen whether the new vice chancellor "is a net gain of a position or not."

Uh oh. But give Peterson credit for interest in possible duplication and lack of oversight within the university's vast array of diversity and equity programs. "I have some concerns," he says, "about how well coordinated those efforts are."

The Independence Institute, which has examined CU's diversity programs, suspects they're hardly coordinated at all. "One year after \[the] CU Blue Ribbon Diversity Commission first met," a recent report by the institute concludes, "CU-Boulder's diversity administration still houses an unknown number of programs that receive an unclear amount of funding for an uncertain number of employees who serve an unspecified number of students." The authors believe these programs are costing a lot more than the reported $21.8 million.

Maybe the new vice chancellor can find out.

But even $21.8 million is hardly pocket change. For a lot less, CU ought to be able to contact every minority high school senior in the state who is qualified to attend the school, urge them to apply, invite them for a visit, and offer personalized recruitment services as they approach the day of decision - and maybe even do all this without violating the equal protection clause of the Constitution.

Peterson hopes to hire his vice chancellor for diversity, equity and so forth before the fall semester. With any luck, CU's assistant vice president for diversity may even be on hand to applaud the announcement.

Yes, that post already exists, too.

The verdict on Castro

With Fidel Castro hovering near death, it's time to prepare ourselves for "on the one hand" obituaries.

"On the one hand Castro was a tyrant," many assessments will go, "but on the other hand he . . . "

You can fill in the blank with "built schools," "provided free medical care" or any one of a number of such platitudes.

The current issue of Foreign Policy magazine (foreignpolicy.com) offers a head-spinning preview of the coverage we're likely to see in some quarters. The magazine poses the question, "Was Castro Good for Cuba?" and provides equal space for a pro and con case.

Honestly, the verdict is not so complicated. Castro's Cuba is, first of all, a poor country in which there is almost no political freedom. Second, it is a poor country in which there is almost no economic freedom.

Most people are familiar with Castro's political repression. But to get a sense of how little economic liberty flourishes in Cuba, turn to the 2007 Index of Economic Freedom, published by The Wall Street Journal and the Heritage Foundation. There you'll find Cuba ranking a dismal 156th of 157 nations (29th out of 29 countries in the Americas), meaning things can't get much worse.

In short, Cuba is a tyranny from stem to stern, nearly as bad as the breed gets. There is simply no "on the other hand" about it.

Vincent Carroll is editor of the editorial pages. Reach him at carrollv@RockyMountainNews.com.

Subscribe to the Rocky Mountain News