Rep. Williams was wrong to challenge election. Booting him from TCU board is overkill
Institutions often do just about anything to avoid political controversy. And in some cases, such as the case of TCU and Rep. Roger Williams, it backfires and escalates the dispute.
Some faculty members and alumni argue that Williams, a TCU graduate himself, should not remain on the university’s governing board because he voted to uphold challenges to election results based on false and exaggerated claims.
The situation puts TCU in a bind. Some faculty members, alumni and, likely, donors want Williams gone. Others are no doubt pushing back against what they see as an effort to silence a conservative lawmaker.
The Board of Trustees will reportedly discuss a new rule to prevent elected officials from serving on the board. It’s understandable to think the solution may be just to make it all go away, but the downsides are considerable.
It’s useful for an institution to have powerful people participate in its governance and offer public support. In this case, Williams, an Austin-based Republican whose district stretches to Tarrant County’s southern line, is a tremendous TCU booster and fundraiser.
BEHIND THE STORY
MOREHey, who writes these editorials?
Editorials are the positions of the Editorial Board, which serves as the Fort Worth Star-Telegram’s institutional voice. The members of the board are: Cynthia M. Allen, columnist; Steve Coffman, editor and president; Bud Kennedy, columnist; Ryan J. Rusak, opinion editor; and Nicole Russell, editorial writer and columnist. Most editorials are written by Rusak or Russell. Editorials are unsigned because they represent the board’s consensus positions, not the views of individual writers.
Read more by clicking the arrow in the upper right.
How are topics and positions chosen?
The Editorial Board meets regularly to discuss issues in the news and what points should be made in editorials. We strive to build a consensus to produce the strongest editorials possible, but when we differ, we put matters to a vote.
The board aims to be consistent with stances it has taken in the past but usually engages in a fresh discussion based on new developments and different perspectives.
We focus on local and state news, though we will also weigh in on national issues with an eye toward their impact on Texas or the Dallas-Fort Worth area.
How are these different from news articles or signed columns?
News reporters strive to keep their opinions out of what they write. They have no input on the Editorial Board’s stances. The board consults their reporting and expertise but does its own research for editorials.
Signed columns by writers such as Allen, Kennedy and Rusak contain the writer’s personal opinions.
How can I respond to an editorial, suggest a topic or ask a question?
We invite readers to write letters to be considered for publication. The preferred method is an email to letters@star-telegram.com. To suggest a topic or ask a question, please email Rusak directly at rrusak@star-telegram.com.
What to do about members of Congress who cast election-challenge votes is a conundrum. About two-thirds of Republicans in the House objected to congressional recognition of election results from at least one battleground state. Among them were several Texans, including Dallas-Fort Worth area lawmakers Michael Burgess of Pilot Point, Beth Van Duyne of Irving and Ron Wright of Arlington.
Most did so on the grounds that there were questions of fraud or legal manipulation substantial enough to make Joe Biden’s victory over Donald Trump suspect. Others said it was a way to draw attention to the issue of voter fraud.
Once again, there was no evidence of fraud anywhere near the scale to deliver even a single state to Trump. It’s for states to determine their own election procedures. And feeding misplaced suspicion about a legal election without substantial fraud to promote a cause is divisive and wrong.
As we’ve said before, Republicans who went down this path should stand up, admit they were wrong and help lead their followers away from lies and dangerous conspiracy theories.
But the mere act of voting for challenges that were not going to overcome a Democratic majority in either chamber of Congress is far from incitement of the despicable Capitol riot of Jan. 6. Conflation of the two has gotten wildly out of hand.
Democrats who objected to the Electoral College results in 2000, 2004 and 2016 weren’t driven from office or volunteer positions they held. To suggest Williams is responsible in some significant way for the riot and must be shunned is at best an overreaction. It smacks of political opportunism.
So does Williams’ response to the possible board action, though. He’s been fundraising off it, sending an email that portrays him as a warrior for free speech battling “liberal professors” who are targeting him only because he’s conservative.
Perhaps ideology is part of the motivation. But in this case, the problem isn’t Williams’ opinions. It’s not an opinion to say the election was stolen or there was massive fraud. It’s at best an unproven allegation and at worst an outright lie. Williams’ rights are not the issue; his judgment is.
And in interviews, Williams has talked down the TCU faculty. No one who loves the university as much as Williams does should trash talk it for political gain.
The Board of Trustees should consider admonishing Williams, but it’s too much to suggest he leave the board over this. And worse, a blanket policy against elected officials serving the institution smacks of an attempt to steer clear of controversy, not to operate by principle.
Editor’s note: Opinion editor Ryan J. Rusak’s wife is a TCU employee. She does not work in university administration.
This story was originally published February 2, 2021 at 10:30 AM.