EDITORIAL: "Business as Usual II"

The Wharton School hasThe Wharton School hasdone it again -- turned aThe Wharton School hasdone it again -- turned aspeech of universal appealThe Wharton School hasdone it again -- turned aspeech of universal appealinto a private affair.The Wharton School hasdone it again -- turned aspeech of universal appealinto a private affair.___________________________ A Wharton official said this week that because the invitation indicated Clinton would address the business school, "the audience should be a predominantly business school audience." Who wrote the invitation? Who forgot to use the "Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania" letterhead? Last time we checked, "predominantly" meant 51 percent, even in Wharton classes on mergers and acquisitions. But of 750 tickets available for the speech, only 50 seats -- a mere 7 percent -- were reserved for non-Wharton students and faculty. Moreover, the speech Clinton plans to deliver tommorrow is meant to serve as "his major economic policy address." Whether the Arkansas governor realizes it or not, Economics is still in the College. All of this flies in the face of the "One University" concept. This ideal once again appears to be the empty promise of an administation trying to appeal to all prospective students, whether it can make the individual schools deliver the goods or not. Ironically, Clinton himself is regularly accused of such populist tactics. Contrast this with Anita Hill's visit. Although Women's Studies did hoard a large number of seats, Connaissance distributed the majority of the Irvine Auditorium tickets -- 900, in fact -- on a first-come, first-serve basis. In fairness, we should also contrast this with the Wharton-organized visit of U.S. Defense Secrary Richard Cheney last fall. At least the location this time -- Annenberg Center's Zellerbach Theater -- is a bit larger and more presentable than Dunlop Auditorium. Organizers also made plans this time to simulcast Clinton's speech to some of the overflow crowd. And 50 non-Wharton tickets is slightly better than none. In general, we can't argue with a benefactor who decides to restrict tickets to an endowed lecture series. That is the donor's right, even though we do consider such a decision a tad impolite. Clinton, however, was invited by Wharton MBA students and won't be paid for his appearance. In this case, the decision to restrict attendance not only seems unnecessary and impolite, but of no visible benefit to any party involved. Regardless of the audience mix, Clinton would still receive publicity that he delivered his "major economic policy address" to Wharton. The Wharton name would still appear in Friday's New York Times. Meanwhile, opening up most of the seats to the University at large -- yes, that includes Wharton -- would guarantee the candidate the most enthusiastic audience possible. Those most eager to see Clinton -- both from Wharton and from "the outside" -- would in all likelihood be the people first in line for tickets. Given the political leanings of Wharton students -- even Wharton Democrats have been known to joke that "Yes, there are some!" -- which audience do you think the candidate would prefer? This isn't about what Clinton expected when he received his invitation -- this is about the continuing lack of propriety of a few stingy Wharton students and administrators. In the future, Wharton has two choices. It can continue the exclusionary policies that alienate many while yielding no tangible benefits to the school or anyone else -- or it can start being inclusionary, and reap some P.R. dividends here at home. Given his reputation as a populist, we wonder what Clinton would do. At the very least, he would appear to care.