For David Bennett, a professor of history at the Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs at Syracuse University, financial contributions to presidential candidates is one method he uses to influence the elections.

‘I strongly feel that it’s critically important to change the president and the White House in this election campaign,’ said Bennett, who donated $500 to retired Gen. Wesley Clark. ‘If you want to make your views known, you have to financially contribute to a campaign.’

Bennett is one of only six SU professors – who have identified themselves as such – to contribute financially to a presidential candidate or major political party for the 2004 election cycle, according to the Center for Responsive Politics’ records.

Their combined contributions total $8,750, a figure that pales in contrast to the top contributing university: Harvard University.

Leading the way for campaign contributions among educational institutions, Harvard’s donations totaled $169,101 as of November 2003, according to a Center for Responsive Politics’ report. Like most universities, Harvard’s contributions are individual donations from faculty and staff members.

The considerable disparity between SU, Harvard and other top contributing universities is linked to income level, political traditions and positions, said Rogan Kersh, an associate professor of politics at Maxwell.

‘Professors at Ivy League schools earn up to twice as much as SU professors, so they simply have more disposable income,’ Kersh said.

The comparative lack of financial contributions by SU faculty is also a result of SU’s old-fashioned style of political involvement, Kersh said.

‘We have a political tradition that includes a more direct, personal engagement, rather than sending a check,’ Kersh said. ‘People donate their time rather than money, because it’s the resource we have more of, whereas Harvard University and other urban campuses practice checkbook participation.’

This semester, two of Kersh’s students are campus coordinators for different presidential candidates.

In addition to lower incomes and a traditional mentality of political involvement, SU professors tend to have a more centrist, middle-of-the-road perspective of politics, Kersh said.

‘There is a lack of polarization, with very few professors taking an extreme conservative or liberal position,’ Kersh said. ‘This leads to a lack of involvement in the primary season. But as the election goes on, more and more centrists will become involved.’

One trend that remains true across the education industry is majority support of Democratic candidates. Sixty-five percent of all donations from the 20 top-contributing universities support Democratic candidates, as do all six SU professors, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

Dr. Thomas Fondy, an SU professor of biology and chemistry, donated a total of $1,000 in 2003 to former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean. Despite Dean’s withdrawal from the presidential race, Fondy plans to continue his financial contributions to whoever becomes the Democratic nominee.

‘I am dead set against what’s been going on with Bush,’ said Fondy. ‘By giving money to candidates, you are giving them encouragement and credibility. Donating money is a way of voting.’

Although Fondy is one of few SU professors who donate, he is one of many to do so in his profession. The education industry ranks fifteenth out of the top 80 industries in campaign giving. And 98 percent of the $5.5 million donated by the education industry were contributions made by individuals, such as the faculty and staff of universities, according to the Federal Election Commission. In the education industry, there are very few contributions made by political action groups or universities themselves.

Richard D. Schwartz, an SU professor of sociology and social sciences and a professor of law, has a history of contributing politically. But this election marked his highest donation yet. He and his wife donated $5,000 to the Dean campaign last year and they now plan to contribute to other Democratic candidates, Schwartz said.

‘The need to become involved seems to me greater now than ever before,’ said Schwartz. ‘The Democrats must raise substantial sums of money to counter the economic advantages that the Republicans have. Money is increasingly important in the current political process.’

Published on March 16, 2004 at 12:00 pm