A need for dialogue

Our mysterious endowment is so powerful because, in order to ensure financial stability and growth, the Princeton University Investment Company invests millions of it yearly in diverse corporations and causes. Its intent is, of course, to maximize returns such that the University might provide better conditions, courses and opportunities to the Princeton student community. However, a scandal arose recently when HEI — a hospitality operator and owner of several Marriots, Sheratons, and Hiltons — proudly proclaimed that prestigious Princeton was one of its major investors. HEI is infamous for the persistent negligence of its workers’ rights, having had to settle multiple charges with the National Labor Relations Board in the past three years. Without the company’s timely announcement, Princeton’s regular financial contribution to its ethically questionable conduct would have remained unnoticed. Only after three years of vigorous student campaigning has Princeton promised to no longer invest in HEI and perpetuate violations of the labor law.

The HEI scandal was embarrassing; it gave us students a glimpse of the dangers of an unregulated investment policy. Despite this decision by PRINCO, there is still no established place for the University community to express its concerns on a more regular basis. The decision to no longer invest in HEI has not yet led to a more transparent endowment. It is a great step that PRINCO has agreed to end investment in HEI, but it must be the first of a series of steps towards greater social responsibility.

The Princeton administration is constantly stressing the value of civic service such that we — as privileged students — understand the importance of giving back to the community that has provided so much for us. But despite our rhetoric preaching service to the nation, we lag far behind other Ivy League universities — such as Yale and Brown — that have established endowment oversight committees to monitor investment practices. These committees, consisting of undergraduates, graduates, faculty and administrators, play an advisory role by convening regularly to produce reports for the investment office.

The reason these committees are so commendable is that they enable the universities to adhere to their social missions while at the same time maximizing investment returns. Following their example, Princeton must look to establish an investment strategy that considers both profits and the social good.

Fortunately, there has been recent activity among the student body to end this apathy. This week’s referendum will poll Princeton students’ positions on the issue of endowment responsibility. Through orchestrated student cooperation, we can demand a reasonable and wholly feasible demand: dialogue. It is precisely this sustained dialogue between the administration and the student body over finances that has ensured that other universities become aligned with social goals. As Princeton students, we are entitled to, at the very least, know the causes and companies that we are supporting financially. This referendum is an opportunity to create a place for conversation and dialogue. An endowment oversight committee will bring our University together to define what social responsibility means to us as students, as faculty, as staff and as alumni. The committee will effect concrete change that ensures our endowment is invested not only to maximize profit, but also in accordance with our values as a University community.

Yongmin Cho is a sophomore from Seoul, South Korea and the point person for the Princeton Coalition for Endowment Responsibility’s sponsorship of a referendum about endowment transparency in the USG election. He can be reached at yongminc@princeton.edu.