Lawmakers cite embattled prof as example of poor accountability

By Brittany Anas

06/13/07

Leading Republican lawmakers Tuesday said taxpayers will likely be leery of approving tax increases to fund higher education, partly because of the Ward Churchill debacle playing out at the state's flagship university.

The GOP's skepticism follows a weekend higher-education summit held in Colorado Springs. More than 40 of the state's leaders, including university presidents, presented ideas to pump more money into colleges and universities, which studies show have been severely underfunded.

Senate Republicans say that if there are any pitches for higher taxes, they would likely fall on deaf ears until school leaders can demonstrate greater accountability with the money they already have.

Sen. Andy McElhany, R-Colorado Springs, said the Churchill dismissal case is eroding the public's confidence in higher education. He expressed frustration that the tenured professor has not yet been fired and instead remains on paid suspension.

"Years into this controversy, his lawyer still has the system tied up in knots," McElhany said. "The public must be wondering just what it takes to fire somebody in higher education."

CU's Board of Regents has since adopted a series of reforms to tighten the time it takes to fire a tenured professor found guilty of misconduct.

Churchill is requesting that the school's regents hear his dismissal case, his attorney, David Lane, said this week.

"It's in the regents' court now," Lane said. "We will exercise all options that are available to us."

The closed-door hearing would be the next step in a lengthy academic-misconduct case that has involved extensive investigations into Churchill's written works, hearings with faculty committees and counter-claims from the professor's supporters. The firebrand professor first sparked controversy in 2005 with his essay on Sept. 11, 2001, that compared some victims of the terrorist attacks to a notorious Nazi.

CU President Hank Brown — in a 10-page report last month addressed to Board of Regents chairwoman Pat Hayes — said he determined Churchill should be dismissed as a result of academic-misconduct violations. The regents must approve any termination of a tenured professor.

A CU investigative committee last year concluded that Churchill invented facts, plagiarized entire works and misrepresented the authorship of articles.

But Lane says his client will file a First Amendment lawsuit against the school if its leaders hand down any punishment, claiming that the university is retaliating against Churchill for his controversial speech.

"If the regents suspend him, we will go to court," Lane said. "If the regents fire him, we will go to court. Short of a written apology by the regents, we will go to court."

Churchill has said the university process was biased against him and that he thinks he will get a fairer hearing in court.