As a proud alumna of Syracuse University, I was disappointed to learn that my school had succumbed to the pressures of a political campaign and committed to divest our endowment of fossil fuel investments.

What the leaders of SU have failed to recognize is that calls for divestment are rooted in environmental activism led by 350.org, a well-funded organization more concerned with publicity stunts than negotiating real solutions. Harvard University President Drew Faust, when explaining the reasoning behind the school’s decision not to divest its $36 billion endowment, acknowledged the campaign’s activist ties by saying, “The endowment is a resource, not an instrument to impel social or political change.”

Beyond the political angle, SU is proceeding under the assumption that the school’s primary form of funding will not shrink as a result of divestment. Professor Daniel Fischel of the University of Chicago Law School recently compared the performance of divested and non-divested portfolios, concluding that the divested portfolio lost roughly 70 basis points for each year over the 50-year period in which the portfolios were active. If we apply his model to SU’s current endowment of $1.03 billion, the university stands to lose $673,122 per year on investment earnings. Simply put, Fischel said, “Every bit of economic and quantitative evidence available to us today shows that the only entities punished under a fossil-fuel divestment regime are the schools doing the divesting.”

Part of the challenge lies in how to define an unacceptable level of exposure to fossil fuels. Do we choose not to encourage oil and gas companies that perform substantial research in green energy sources, or automotive manufacturers developing revolutionary low-emission cars? In a 2013 note to clients, Mercer, SU’s own endowment manager, wrote that divestment from fossil fuels is “potentially difficult for investors” and that divesting from “such a large sector of equities might be considered a breach of fiduciary duty.”

As a former SU student athlete, I have already been disappointed this year by reports of mismanagement within the ranks, which will undoubtedly negatively impact incoming support to the endowment. To hear that another ill-advised decision has been made — and can’t be blamed on past administrations — begs me to ask whether reputation and image is more important to SU leaders than improving the integrity of the school as an academic institution. Following the commitment made to divestment, I think we may be failing at both.

Shannon Brushe
Syracuse University Class of 2008
B.A. Advertising and Policy Studies