A spring 2004 New York Times article led some alums to understand the committee's purpose as working toward a plan for monetary reparations for slavery. The committee's creation came in the wake of a few class action lawsuits seeking monetary reparations from large corporations. In this context, the public discourse about slavery had shifted in the direction of monetary reparations, said the committee's chair, Associate Professor of History James Campbell.
Though the New York Times article confused some alums as to the committee's official purpose and charge, media appearances by President Ruth Simmons and an April 2004 Boston Globe column dismissing the possibility that Brown would pay monetary reparations provided a more accurate representation of the committee's purpose.
"I think, in a way, the immediate response was itself the best evidence about why a committee like this is important, because it reflected the difficulty Americans have trying to mount a discussion about slavery," Campbell said.
In the committee's three years of existence, it has received and responded to correspondence from over 400 people, Campbell said. "Some have been extremely supportive, some have been scurrilous," he said. He added that the majority of responses have not been from Brown alums but from the general public.
Though students working in the Brown Annual Fund's Student Calling Center may receive an occasional inquiry about the slavery and justice committee, University officials echo Campbell's impression that alums have not been outspoken about the committee.
Secretary of the Corporation Russell Carey '91 said alums he is in contact with who serve on the Brown Corporation are supportive of the committee.
"From my observations, people fully understand it, they were supportive of it," Carey said.
He added that he had not spoken with anyone opposed to the committee's work. "As to the impact for fundraising, I have no idea. ... My impression is little (impact) if any," he said.
Director of Alumni Relations Todd Andrews '83 and President of the Brown Alumni Association Hannelore Rodriguez-Farrar '87 MA '90 both wrote in e-mails to The Herald that alums had not inquired about the committee during their tenures. Vice President for Public Affairs and University Relations Michael Chapman said the only inquiries he received expressed interest in the nature of the committee's final report.
Despite the public nature of their inquiry, committee members were charged to pursue a historical investigation, regardless of public relations or fund raising issues, Campbell said.
"Our task was to do the job we were appointed to, and there were other people in the University who have responsibility for these other arenas," he said.
The Annual Fund factorTammie Ruda, director of the Brown Annual Fund, said after the 2004 New York Times article, student call center workers received questions from alums contacted as potential donors.
"It's safe to say that there were a few people who were concerned that the committee's purpose was to pay reparations," she said. "Usually when we explained the actual charge, people accepted it and moved on."
Student callers are told to explain the committee's purpose to any alum who might raise the issue and then direct him or her to the committee's Web site.
"It's not anything more magical than that, and we don't feel like there's anything the University has to hide," Ruda said.
Alums have brought up the committee infrequently in recent months. "It's been a long time since we've heard anything about it," she said.
Ari Nielsen '06, a student manager in the calling center, said when alums do bring up the committee these days, they're usually upset about it.
"It's usually someone who is upset or someone who may be misinformed and may ask a question," he said. "A lot of older alums will find any reason that Brown is too liberal and kind of flip out about it, and that's one of the things they'll mention."
When an alum expresses frustration or confusion about the committee, the student caller makes a note in the computer system and the alum will later receive a follow-up letter from the development office further explaining the committee, Nielsen said.
Ruda said she had not seen any committee-related impact on fund raising, adding that the Annual Fund has continued to grow since the committee's creation.
Alum feedbackNorman Boucher, editor and publisher of the Brown Alumni Magazine, which is editorially independent from the University, said the magazine's 2003 feature examining the reparations movement and Brown's ties to slavery, as well as announcing the committee's creation, did not receive a particularly large response.
"It's a controversial topic, so I expected more (response)," Boucher said.
"One of the things we find at the magazine is that a certain number of alums are just set in their paths, whether left or right, and we always hear from them," he said,
Bud Brooks '83 read the BAM article and remains opposed to the committee. A health care insurance salesman based in Dallas, Texas, Brooks said he does not read the New York Times and did not see the 2004 article. He said he became informed of the committee through BAM and The Herald's Web site.
"I'm completely and 100 percent opposed to any reparations for multiple reasons," Brooks said. He said he doubts the committee can produce an unbiased historical inquiry, even though he understand its intent is not to "distribute dollars."
"Where do you draw the line and say 'OK, we're done with slavery,'" Brooks said.
But as an alum who has "removed his interest" from Brown because "it's so darn liberal," Brooks' opinion may not be indicative of those with more current ties to the University.
Stephen Beale '04, an active conservative alum and founder of the Brown Spectator, is a fierce critic of the committee. Among Beale's primary complaints is the makeup of the committee, which he views as predominantly liberal.
"I think President Simmons genuinely wanted to get it right, to make amends, but she may not realize that in an environment that's predominantly liberal, you have to go out of your way and put conservative people on (the committee)," Beale said.
He speculated only a single member of the committee is "on the fence" in political orientation.
But Campbell refuted Beale's perception of the committee.
"I don't know how different people for this committee were chosen, but my impression is that it had nothing to do with our political views but rather our particular fields of scholarly expertise," Campbell said.
Still, Beale questioned even the committee's name.
"I think they have a real activist bent because they're called the slavery and justice committee and that word justice, I just don't think that belongs in a committee that focuses on historical inquiry," Beale said.
Beale cited the committee's organization of a lecture on modern-day slavery last week as "part of this odd notion of justice that has no grounding in reality."
Brooks and Beale agree the committee is one in a series of problems that reflect the liberal climate they believe dominates the University.
"It's 'exhibit A' right now in what's the matter with Brown," Beale said. Though Beale said his complaints about the committee are not uncommon among conservative alums, University representatives said they have received little word from such individuals.
But Campbell said the goal of the committee is not to produce universal agreement.
"I don't have any problem with people arguing with this," Campbell said. "You hope that people who have that argument have an understanding of what the committee is about."
