Handwritten notes of political strategy meetings obtained from an executive officer close to James Duderstadt during the 1992 election cycle give the public key insight into the struggle between the Duderstadt administration and the Board of Regents.  This struggle was later to consume Duderstadt in September 1995 when he resigned under quiet pressure from the Regents.  These documents show the brilliance (predicting in 1992 that the 1994 Congress would landslide to the Republicans) and conceit of the administration (raising attacks on the democratic process), and should be, especially during this 2000 election transition,  a cautionary tale  to future and current boards and presidents;

Specifically, the documents (from the handwritten notes of Doug Van Houweling, then-provost for information technology and now CEO of the second-generation academic internet project "Internet2") reveal many of the deepest political strategy thoughts of the Duderstadt administration.  Some of the key revelations of documents include:

Personal Attacks on Individual Regents

    One Regent from Brighton was called a "redneck rube."  (see below)   To no astute observer's surprise, Deane Baker is asked, "are you as bad as Farris [Womack] says you are?"  A partial list seems to be made of the "worst Regents."  During the Clinton administration transition, the group perceives that the "Board needs to be careful.  Philip [Power] will create the problem."  The entirety of the documents shows a general disrespect for the Regents as individuals.  No wonder that 3 years later in 1995 the Regents secretly forced Duderstadt to resign.

Attacking the Board of Regents as an Institution

On a more defensible tack,  several questions were raised about the proper process for running a university.  The 1963-64 Michigan Constitution's delegation of power to the Regents as statewide elected officials is criticized as subtly destroying university fiscal autonomy.  The group questions the election system.  According to one passage, "elected board can't cut it. Problem is process on the way to board."  Now it is true that the election system process does little to inform the public about the differences between candidates.   The way these candidates are selected (party convention votes), the fact that no one really has time to look at the candidates, and the fact that they receive little money to run campaigns with have created a system whereby until the year 2000 the winners have been the members of the party winning at the top of the ticket (this year though the public seems to have intentionally split its ticket, perhaps as a way of creating deadlock)  There is certainly plenty of room for reform in this process, but one gets a sense that U-M policy makers would do away with the democratic part entirely or attempt to fully dilute it (one proposal was to create a sub-regental appointed body of 50 people which would dilute the 8 elected Regents power).  At other times, it seemed that these pesky little elected officials were just too intrusive.  For example, the notes record suggest that the "key issue is the governing board.  Keep the Regents 'dumb, distracted, divided'."  Since Duderstadt's administration intentionally subverted these officials, we should have little sympathy or surprise that they eventually subverted him.

Other Notes of Interest

In November 1992, the futures group predicted that the 1994 election would result in a Republican landslide in Congress.  There is no question that they were astute political observers.  The author is aware of only a few others suggesting the same and it was certainly no foregone conclusion that 1994 would turn over to the Republican
leadership.

The group suggested the auto industry was in shambles and recommended the firing of each company's top 100 managers (who knows, maybe a good idea at the time).  U-M had and still has heavy research ties with the Big Three.

Some of the first tension between the Engler administration and Duderstadt/U-M begin to show in Duderstadt's suspicion that Engler didn't really try to protect education funding from the chopping block.  The U-M's belief that its political future hinged on K-12 and the teacher's lobby (MEA) is also expressed.  This was somewhat a surprise to the author since although both are education related, there is no necessary linkage between the two interests.  Finally, Duderstadt suggests that U-M should spend $100,000 on "some old-fashion political polling" which he believes will earn him some political leverage with Lansing politicians (and Regents) who can always use free polling data.  Although probably not illegal, it shows a desire to buy favor with regional politicians.

Conclusion

These notes should give some insight to the thoughts and activities of the Duderstadt presidency, but they certainly do not represent the entirety of what is available to be known.  It should also be noted that no presidency is all bad and that these documents should be put into context with the overall accomplishments and failures of the administration.  The author continues to investigate and will continue to update, but these documents should be a cautionary tale to the current president and future boards.

DOCUMENT ONE

What the handwriting says: "Topic:  External Relations Date: 2/6/92 Page: 5 [of handwritten notes] Who from Alum. Assoc.? [arrow to right] Hor????? [unknown proper name]     On a scenario base - state's share will go down.  Problem is Regents represent the state, not whole client/stakeholder base.  Can we develop a larger board around Regents?  About 50 people chosen to represent a broader constituency?  Need to move in that direction.     Elected board can't cut it. Problem is process on the way to board. 'Redneck Rube' from Brighton needs to be kicked off.     Bob Lyons  says to Dean [ sic: Deane ] Baker  - "are you as bad as Farris says you are" Commentary    'Redneck Rube' from Brighton is presumably Neal Nielsen. Rube being the pejorative term synonymous with "hick."

This document was obtained from:
The Bentley Historical Library Collections 
(University of Michigan, Information Technology Division, files belonging to Vice-Provost for Information Technology, Douglas Van Houweling, Box 25, in a folder called "Futures", which was the name of a regular meeting among the executive officer's of the time.

According to page 1 of this sequence present at this meeting were Douglas Van Houweling himself, James Duderstadt, Richard Kennedy, Walter Harrison, Lisa ?, John ?, and Farris  Womack)

DOCUMENT TWO

What the handwriting says. In a document dated a week after the 1992 election, Van Houweling writes about: The Rose Bowl tour . . . [abbreviated] The 11/24 -Regents orientation President forum - worst Regents -    Gene [?] Power, [cryptic meaning here] Harold - Smits [cross out] depended on Nederlander. Does the U have to put on the table a private financing option.  Key issue is the governing board.  Keep the Regents "dumb, distracted, divided".  '63-64 state constitution change cheapened our autonomy. Post election - 2 out of 3.  A Republican-controlled legislature. The problem between now and '94 for Clinton is the Democratic Congress.  Republican landslide in 94.  Balance, no new taxes, education top priority. Boards starting to resist tuition increase. Enrollment balance may no longer be an issue. Dan Gillmour, Hillegonds both friends.  We need to be prepared to move fast. Clinton admin - - good contacts.  Ford AA, Dingle Dearborn. Board needs to be careful.  Philip will create the problem." Commentary:  The prediction of a Republican landslide two years early in the wake of the the Republicans ashes shows political brilliance.  The idea of keeping the Regents "dumb, distracted, and divided," shows the arrogance of the group.

Same Source as above, unknown meeting dated 11/12/1992, "CIA" meaning still unknown.

Miscellaneous documents: text, no image.

2-6-92, p. 1 "external relations"
"Jim wonders how hard Engler worked to protect higher ed."
"We need to keep pressure....
We have to keep carefully together with K-12, but we can be killed if we get separated from MEA....
Tax issues could break education lobby apart (prop. tax reduction).
Term limitation?"

The author was somewhat surprised to learn of how tight policy makers saw the teacher's union lobby's success tied to university success.  Anyone familiar with Michigan politics can understand how important this quotation is in understanding a variety of things.
As to Engler, the battle between Engler and U-M eight
years later is noticeable.  In 1990, my general impression is that U-M looked somewhat positively on Engler's arrival as Governor.  By 1992, concerns are evident.

2-6-92, p. 1 "external relations"
Jim wants to do some "plain old-fashion political polling."  Increases our credibility with Regents, folks in Lansing.  Further will help with Lansing.  100K cost.

Local and state politicians historically have never been able to afford the quality and quantity of polling data that they would like in running their campaign (at least not like what the national party orgs can do).  One presumes free polling data represents an attempt to "buy" these politicians with a favor.  Probably not illegal, but an interesting concept.

"...No hope for Detroit - Chrysler, GM broken up, Ford a European company...
...McCracken, Prahled {sp.?}, Courant see a dim future...
...Prahled thinks top 100 managers need to be fired in each company."

McCracken and Courant are famous U-M economists, although I am not familiar with Prahled.   This is a slam, and in historical hindsight fails to predict the recovery of the auto industry.  Nonetheless, auto execs still have work to do.  You would want to know more about the underpinnings of this belief (U-M does significant research in conjunction with the Detroit auto companies, so they would have some understanding).