Professor James Thurber, the director of AU’s Center For Congressional and Presidential Studies, has a lot to answer for. A poor judgment call on his part has recently resulted in what seems to be university money being spent unethically. It has tainted AU’s good name in the media. Many of the details of this story remain unclear, but what we already know has serious implications.
On Nov. 4, Roll Call newspaper ran a $1,500 ad, paid for by Thurber's center which heaped praises for Thurber's friend, AU adjunct professor Jack Bonner. The ad thanked Bonner for “15 years of teaching excellence” and said, “Students of the Public Affairs and Advocacy Institute are grateful for the knowledge, insight and years of experience you bring to the university.” Judging by Thurber’s reaction to the situation, one can assume that he had some sort of oversight on the approval of the ad.
On the surface, this seems benign. But as the political Web site Talking Points Memo realized, Thurber’s knowledge of this particular ad raises serious ethical questions.
Thurber wasn’t just a friend and colleague of Bonner’s at AU. He was also working pro bono as an ethics adviser to Bonner’s lobbying firm, Bonner & Associates. Bonner badly needed an ethics adviser, because his firm had faced a firestorm of criticism over the summer for sending forged letters to members of Congress. This was a serious scandal. The letters were ostensibly from the NAACP and other organizations concerned about climate change legislation. According to some members, they potentially influenced voting on the House cap and trade bill. Bonner hadn’t known the letters were fake. They were sent by one employee who was promptly fired when all this came to light. He isn’t the story anymore. Thurber is.
The ad can be seen as a public statement of gratitude from CCPS to one of its most beloved professors. However, it might also be interpreted as an attempt to get good PR about a lobbying organization printed in “the newspaper of Capitol Hill” just months after that organization had its reputation tainted by scandal.
Thurber’s reputation suggests this second scenario is unlikely. He is well-respected at AU. His history suggests he is a man of integrity. But questions remain. What was his specific role in the creation of the ad? Did he propose the idea? Did he draft the language? CCPS should explain why there was no oversight on this. They should outline a plan to prevent things like this from happening in the future.
Thurber has said he “regrets the impact” of an ad that thanked “a long-time colleague who is involved in political controversy.” But he owes this campus more than that. He should explain everything. He should be totally transparent. And he should apologize for using university money inappropriately.
