Commencing controversy

Student activism at PSU is wonderful. I appreciate the fact that we have so many students on campus willing to get involved. I don’t appreciate it when student activists jump to unwarranted conclusions and wind up making themselves (and by extension, the school) look foolish.

Recently, there was a small controversy over the selection of the 2006 commencement speaker, Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.). Student activists cited his “yes” vote on a key immigration reform bill that would make illegal immigration a felony as automatic disqualification from speaking to the graduating class of 2006, of which I am a part.

A May 25 news piece in the Vanguard detailed how a group of students, now calling themselves the Student Immigration Solidarity Coalition, has gone so far as to meet with President Dan Bernstine and table on campus. Either in an attempt to get DeFazio booted as commencement speaker, or to persuade him to reverse his vote on H.R. 4437, the immigration reform bill, they are urging students to call DeFazio’s and Bernstine’s offices and complain about the issue.

DeFazio responded to students’ concerns with a May 26 op-ed piece in the Vanguard, describing in patient prose the legislative process and the complexity of his views on illegal immigration. His article explains that, while he did vote “yes” on H.R. 4437, he voted yes primarily because the bill contains strong sanctions against employers who exploit illegal workers, and improves border security. The finalized bill, he reassures the worried PSU populace, is currently undergoing revisions in the Senate, revisions that will remove the criminalization of current illegal immigrants.

The students’ ire at DeFazio’s vote is completely unfounded. Not only did they not take the time to investigate the particulars of the bill, but they also jumped to the conclusion that DeFazio was anti-immigration without even examining his voting record. One involved student said that DeFazio’s inclusion in the ceremony would be viewed as a “slap in the face” to those who were planning to attend this year’s graduation ceremony with undocumented family members. Another student said he viewed it as an “attack on a lot of people I’m graduating with.” Finally, in a letter to DeFazio’s office students sent on May 22, the ultimatum was given that unless Rep. DeFazio “took action” by June 2, the students “do intend to protest the inclusion of your voice in our celebration.” What the hell? Whatever happened to open-mindedness, to our vaunted culture of at least listening to all voices? All of the above statements read as if the students were expecting DeFazio to get up on stage and deliver a fire-and-brimstone sermon denouncing the evils of illegal immigration, a scenario that would be remotely possible only if DeFazio was as single-issue hot-button as some of the students at PSU. Thank goodness for our legislative process that he is not.

My question is: Why did these people leap before they looked? My own independent digging on Rep. DeFazio’s voting record turned up a generalized support for loosening immigration policies, including a “no” vote on reporting illegal aliens who receive hospital treatment (May 2004), a “yes” vote on extending Immigrant Residency Rules (May 2001), and a “no” vote on more immigrant visas for skilled workers (September 1998). He self-identifies in the Vanguard op-ed as a progressive populist, and the web site ontheissues.org identifies him as a slightly left-leaning liberal, midway between libertarian and populist. It took me maybe 15 minutes on the internet to compile this information. The voting record of any public representative is part of the public record. So why don’t so-called student activists do their research?

The PSU campus climate is, for a particular subset of students, one of involvement and activism, and while I wish that climate was replicated in schools all across the country, I also believe it needs to be tempered with critical thinking, research, fact-finding skills and rationality – as opposed to emotionality. All too often I think PSU student activists get emotional about perceived injustice and start “doing something” about it before they have fully grasped the complexity of the situation. Just because you’ve figured out how to make phone calls, write petitions and set up tables doesn’t mean you understand the complexities of the political process.

And while it is laudable that they are doing anything at all, I fear that at PSU it is often action, rather than discretion, that is mistaken as the better part of valor.