Fagin takes step on policy: But forward or backward?

Since becoming interim president on July 1, Claire Fagin has worked hard to disassociate herself from former President Sheldon Hackney and his reputation for indecision. Earlier this semester, she took the initiative and met with the editorial boards of The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, The New York Times and The Philadelphia Inquirer, in order to improve the University's recently hostile portrayal by the press. After those meetings, University spokeswoman Barbara Beck said some editors had a renewed respect for Fagin's honesty and straight-forwardness – traits they accused Hackney of lacking. But now, a day after she announced her decision to keep Part II of the University's racial harassment policy – the so-called "speech code" – and appoint a committee to come up with a new policy by June 30, Fagin's response may attract negative press of its own. Addressing the "speech code" dilemma seemed like a good idea in September. With so many complaints from both minority and non-minority faculty and students who said that the code just doesn't work, Fagin was under increasing pressure to change the policy. And for a while, Fagin was clearly considering suspending Part II. In September, she noted that "many people on campus, faculty and students, including African-Americans and other racial, ethnic and national minorities" have said the code "has proved unworkable and destructive." But when the W.E.B. DuBois College House received racially-motivated bomb threats in mid-October – just days before Fagin originally planned to announce her decision – the issue soon ballooned into a campus-wide controversy. Following the threats, Fagin's initial plan to take action in a quick, decisive manner became harder to execute. In tackling the controversies that Hackney had been accused of side-stepping, Fagin hit a snag. Citing the "complex" nature of the issue, she delayed her decision again and again. "This is a very hard issue, and right now there is no consensus at all," Fagin said two weeks ago. "It is my decision, but I would like to arrive at something that is not divisive on campus." And yet, the last thing she said she wanted to do was be compared to Hackney by appearing to waffle on the issue. "I don't want to be a wimp," she said to a group of students over dinner last week. But that's exactly what many students on campus are saying about her recent decision, although many said they support her decision. Some have even said it reminds them of a "Hackneyism," defined by John Leo in this week's U.S. News and World Report as a "a very serious condition marked by torpor, mushiness and a distinct feeling that one's spine is missing." Fagin ardently denies these accusations, saying many people have "misunderstood" her decision. "It's totally untrue [that this is not action]," she said last night. "Just because it's not immediate doesn't mean it's not taking action." It is true that Fagin could have simply not made a decision at all. She could have delayed her decision indefinitely, citing an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission proposal on workplace harassment that might – if passed by Congress in the next two years – mandate a "speech code" for all University employees. Even though the EEOC proposal would have no effect on students and might not come to pass, it could have been an easy way out. But Fagin said she did not want to do that, saying this issue was too important to ignore. "I think it was a prudent decision," she said.

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.