Editorial | An unwanted spotlight
Illustrated by Kaz Fantone
We’d like to begin by commending Dean Lisa Sparks for all the hard work she put into her campaign. Although the results might not have been what she hoped for, it’s always encouraging and inspiring to see women active in the political atmosphere and we wish her an easy transition back to campus should she decide to return.
Her campaign wasn’t without flaw, and it had its fair share of controversies and news storms. But then again, what campaign doesn’t? We hope to see Dean Sparks continue working toward achieving the goals she aspires to.
That being said, should a member of the Chapman administration decide to run again, we hope that they do things differently.
The problem with this specific campaign wasn’t Dean Spark’s platform, her policies or even her decorum. It was the fact that, by remaining a dean at Chapman while attempting to run for Congress, she automatically represented much more than herself. She represented over 8,000 students, she represented some faculty who didn’t agree with her positions, thus placing them in an uncomfortable position and she represented our entire school without permission.
As students of a university, it goes without saying that we should be the top priority of this institution. We’re the reason Chapman is Chapman, we’re the life of this university and without any students there would be no college. We should be the highest priority and that’s why Dean Sparks should have resigned when she decided to run for Congress. It shows that she’s putting her students first.
Having a Dean at your school run for a public seat casts an unwanted spotlight on students who did not sign up for this.
Furthermore, for a school that seems blatantly hyper-fixated with its image and reputation, it seems out-of-character to allow one person to act as a de facto representative for the school. Sparks’ extremely public tie to deanship while running for a partisan position was an adverse move for the university because, regardless of intention, her campaign served as an extremely public display of Chapman. That representation isn’t fair to our campus, a campus with diverse opinions, politics and ideas. Dean Sparks is not us and we are not her. Yet her campaign lumped the two together.
We think everyone and anyone should be allowed to run for public office. That’s not what is up for debate here. What frustrates us, what has made us question the entire campaign is the fact that Sparks’ chose not to step down from the very beginning. That move sets a dangerous precedent for our school, a precedent we hope to avoid in the future.
Take Dr. John Eastman’s campaign for Attorney General of California for example of what should have happened. After Eastman announced his intent to run in 2010, he stepped down as Dean of Chapman’s Fowler School of Law, removing himself from the evident connection he had to Chapman. This is what should have happened with Dean Sparks and it’s the reason we’re writing this piece now.
Anyone has the ability to run for office. The responsible move to make in that position would be to unaffiliate yourself with the campus, its students and faculty. A judge would recuse himself from a trial that had conflicting interests – the same kind of move should be made when powerful figures at universities run for public office, regardless of political affiliation.
It doesn’t matter what party she aligned with or what policies she advocated for. It matters that students were involuntarily tied to a campaign, especially a campaign that was taking place in times as controversial and partisan as this.
It’s exhausting to be a student. It’s this weird time in our lives when we’re battling the stress of growing up with the excitement of finally gaining independence. It’s tough, it’s tricky and it’s a lot of weight to hold on our shoulders. Being concerned that your university is being represented by someone whose views don’t reflect that of yours is something we shouldn’t have to worry about.