Corey D. B. Walker
Department of Religious Studies
University of Virginia

First, I want to thank SUUVA, the Graduate Labor Union, and the Student Living Wage Campaign for organizing this rally. I also want to thank all those who have decided to join in voicing their concern, or rather, their righteous anger, at the Charter University Proposal.

My remarks are critically influenced by my current status as a member of the faculty here at the University of Virginia as well as my being an alumnus and former member and Vice-Rector of the Board of Visitors of another Virginia higher educational institution, Norfolk State University. It is from this perspective that I have arrived at the conclusion that the Charter Proposal represents the latest measure by higher education elites in the Commonwealth to fully cede the control of the University to a new authority. (1)

Throughout its history, the higher educational institutions have struggled to free themselves from various forms of authoritarianism. Centuries ago it was the Church. Today, it is the market. (2)

In a strange twist of fate, as students, faculty, and staff of the University of Virginia, we find ourselves confronted with a quite intriguing phenomenon. Those who administer the University now are actively seeking the "secure" the health and well being of this institution by placing it under the authority of the market. Without dialogue or discussion with its core institutional partners - students, faculty, staff, and citizens of the Commonwealth - the administration has unveiled a plan to place the University firmly in the grasp of this authority.

In its pronouncements hailing the benefits of this new benevolent authority - a gracious authority that yields only good things to all people - we find the following language:

The key to the proposed legislation is enabling U.Va., Virginia Tech, and William and Mary to use their untapped "market share" to produce additional revenues. The potential of the "market share" is demonstrated by the fact that these universities annually receive many more applications for admission than they can accept. . . . Clearly, many of the applicants would be willing to accept greater costs for the opportunity to enjoy a high-quality education. (3)

Clearly, the benefits of leveraging the University's "market share" is so commonsensical and so powerful that only those who are blind cannot see its advantages. Indeed, future students would be willing to pay more just for the opportunity to attend this institution. The blessings of the benevolent authority of the market are best for the University and the entire Commonwealth. In the vernacular, this is a "win-win" situation.

But we must ask a simple question: How is it that such a "win-win" situation comes out of a conversation where all the stakeholders are not at the table and are not full members of the deliberations? (4)

Just like the administrators centuries ago who lauded the old authority of the Church over the university and advised all to trust this authority, we are being told today to trust - no, have faith - in the market and those who seek to bring its benefits to us. This is the message of our administration, the angelic messengers of the market. In this respect, the market is God.

But I am a skeptical of the God-like status of the market. As a theologian and a person of faith, I must tell you that the market is not God. The market is not all good. It is not all-powerful. It is not benevolent. And, most importantly, the market is not just.

Thus, when we begin to critically analyze the very real and often traumatic conditions that are being glossed over in this rhetoric of the market being marshaled in support of this Charter University proposal we begin to see a bit more clearly what is truly at stake.

In other words, when we recognize that

" Fewer than 9% [of UVA undergraduates] are eligible for Pell Grants (5) ;

" 1 in 5 of UVA students from last year's incoming class reported family incomes of $200,000 or more while only 2.4% of U.S. households earn that much (6);

" "At the 146 most selective colleges, only 3% of students come from families in the bottom quarter of income, while 74% come from those in the top quarter (7); and

" Tuition is climbing while the income gap is growing - as attested to nationally as well as locally in light of the new study from the Thomas Jefferson Partnership for Economic Development (8)

we readily see what is clearly at stake.

Moreover, the stakes become even clearer when we read under Article 2, section 7 of the proposed Charter agreement that the University still plans to "continue to fully participate in, and receive funding support from the many and varied programs established now or in the future by the Commonwealth to provide support for Virginia's public institutions of higher education and for Virginians attending such institutions . . . . (9)

The rhetoric of the market is but the latest mask of a situation in higher education, particularly here at the University of Virginia, best characterized by a phrase used by the current President Bush to describe his supporters - "the haves and the have mores." (10) Indeed, the very small opening of the doors of Mr. Jefferson's University is quickly closing, especially for those least able to afford the price of admission. (11) Ironically, as the doors of the University open wider to "the haves and have mores," the current University administration has seen fit to maintain wide access to the tax revenues of all Virginians in this Charter effort.

I willingly concede the point that our legislators in Richmond have not upheld their financial responsibility to the public colleges and universities of the Commonwealth. But to cede control of the University to the ruinous ideology and torturous logic of the market is not the answer.

Comrades, despite all of the rhetoric, despite all of the meetings, despite all of the web pages that seemingly announce that the passage of this proposal is a foregone conclusion, we are not in The Matrix. The discourse of the "Charter University" is not the "sound of inevitability." And thus, we must commit ourselves to organize and mobilize the thousands of faculty, staff, students, and citizens across the Commonwealth for this democratic struggle.

This rally marks a beginning - a new beginning - of a long and arduous struggle to truly democratize higher education in Virginia. Have no doubt about it; this will be a long and tough fight. This fight will take us from the coalfields of southwest Virginia to the migrant farm camps of the Eastern Short to the steps of the capital in Richmond. Indeed, this is one of the most critical fronts in the revolution of our time. And we must stand committed to seeing the full democratization of higher education in the commonwealth. Hasta la victoria siempré! (12)

Thank you.

(1) See my earlier statement on this issue in Corey D. B. Walker, "Higher Ed Crisis: A Slavish Devotion to the
Bottom Line," Op-Ed, The Virginian-Pilot, October 15, 2000. For an analysis of this and similar proposals for
financing public higher education see David W. Breneman, "Are the States and Public Higher Education Striking a
New Bargain?" AGB Public Policy Paper No. 04-02 (July, 2004).
(2) For a critical historical analysis of this development see Clyde W. Barrow, Universities and the Capitalist State: Corporate Liberalism and the Reconstruction of American Higher Education, 1894-1928 (Madison: University of
Wisconsin Press, 1990).
(3) University of Virginia, "Background and Full Proposal," Commonwealth Chartered Universities and Colleges,
http://www.virginia.edu/chartereduniversities/background.html, emphasis added.
(4) One is reminded of the mid 1990's conversation on higher education privatization recalled by Gordon Davies that occurred in "John's [U.Va. president John Casteen's] living room." See the David L. Kirp, "Mr. Jefferson's University Breaks Up: Thomas Jefferson, University of Virginia, Privatization, and Finance," The Public Interest (Summer, 2002).
(5) Mary Beth Marklein, "Low-Income Students Scarce at Elite Colleges," USA Today, September 20, 2004.
(6) Ibid.
(7) Editorial, "Top Schools, Rich Students," USA Today, September 23, 2004.
(8) See Peter Schmidt, "'Report Card' Spurs Calls for Change in Academe," The Chronicle of Higher Education, September 24, 2004 and Reed Williams, "Area's Wage Disparity Growing," The Daily Progress, September 30, 2004.
(9) University of Virginia, "Chartered Agreement Template," Commonwealth Chartered Universities and Colleges, http://www.virginia.edu/chartereduniversities/charteredtemplate.html.
(10) Then candidate George W. Bush is quoted as saying, "Some people call you the elites, I call you my base." See "Bush and Gore Do New York," CBS News, October 20, 2000. Available at http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2000/10/18/politics/main242210.shtml.
A full and critical assessment of the University of Virginia's AccessUVA program is still forthcoming. Given the 10-year trend by the National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education's "Measuring Up 2004," I am not that optimistic about this program (and others like it announced by other elite public and private colleges and universities) as a critical intervention in higher educational access for low-income students.
(11) "Always until victory!" - Ernesto "Che" Guevara