Voters should reject a regents’ amendment motivated by partisanship

THE ISSUE Voters are being asked to amend the state Constitution to change the method of choosing University of Hawaii regents.

VOTERS are being asked to approve a constitutional amendment that would strip Gov. Linda Lingle of much of her authority to appoint regents at the University of Hawaii. Her selections would be limited to candidates chosen by a panel assembled by the Legislature. This amendment should be rejected as a Democratic power play that could jeopardize the university's accreditation.

UH regents now are nominated by the governor and confirmed by the state Senate, a system that has provided adequate oversight for the selection of regents under previous Democratic governors.

The proposed makeover was raised with good intentions by the Association of Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges. Two years ago, Richard T. Ingram, then the association's president, testified to the Hawaii Legislature in favor of governors appointing regents from candidates approved by "independent screening committees ... enacted and sustained with bipartisan support."

In correspondence last year with UH President David McClain, Ingram advised against screening committees "composed of special interest representatives," according to legislative testimony by Linda Johnsrud, UH interim associate vice president. Ingram also recommended to McClain that screening committee members be selected by the governor, Johnsrud said.

The heavily Democratic Legislature, however, does not intend to give the governor that power. Under the proposed amendment, the Legislature would determine the "composition, qualifications and specific duties" of the screening committee members. In a separate bill, lawmakers mandated that the screening committee would have seven members, one each appointed by the Senate president, the House speaker, the governor, the faculty senate, the student caucus, former regents and the alumni association -- a hodgepodge of special interests. Lingle vetoed that bill, but should the amendment pass the measure will surely resurface.

In a letter this month to the president of the UH Board of Regents, concern about the proposed amendment was expressed by Barbara A. Beno, president of the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges. Beno said the commission had "urged changes to depoliticize the university so that it will meet accreditation standards for independence." The proposed composition of the screening committee, she added, "may create a direct means for the government to become more involved in the university's governance, counter to past recommendations by WASC (Western Association of Schools & Colleges)."

This proposed amendment and another that would end mandatory retirement of judges at age 70 are next to each other on the ballot and emit the same foul odor of partisan politics -- a Democratic Legislature trying to scale back the authority of a Republican governor.