OPINION: Board of Trustees’ Executive Committee lacks diversity

A few weeks ago, USC Board of Trustees chairman Rick Caruso, chairman, disclosed the names of the voting members of the Board’s Executive Committee to the Daily Trojan. Until then, their identities had been kept secret. Most students had only heard of the members through the various buildings and schools named after them scattered throughout campus — Ronald Tutor, Wallis Annenberg, David Dornsife.

It was shocking that Caruso decided to reveal the names of the Executive Committee even amid the newfound effort for transparency. This decision was made right in the middle of the University’s involvement in the largest college admissions bribery scandal ever prosecuted by the United States Department of Justice. But also, perhaps one of the biggest shocks was that the reveal confirmed what most students already knew — USC is truly run by white people. Specifically, white men.

In many ways, this revelation was still unexpected. Honestly, it would be more remarkable if an executive committee of any governmental or educational institution was not led by a majority of white men. This country and the systems which run within it are still governed by the same people who have always governed the laws of the land. But as we reach a turning point and as more voices are demanding to be heard, this old way of representation has proven to not be a true or reliable voice in a diverse, modern-day society.

At USC, the Board of Trustees’ Executive Committee is responsible for voting on some of the University’s most important issues and, for the most part, holds the same power as the Board. According to documents obtained by the Daily Trojan, the voting committee comprises 14 men and only three women; six venture capitalists, five real estate moguls, one oil tycoon, one educator, one philanthropist, one leader in health and one in communication. Most of the 17 members are white.

To the credit of the many accomplished men on the committee, no one is saying that rich, old white men cannot be the voices of a diverse student body. But even Ben & Jerry’s — yes, the ice cream company — states that “when white people occupy most positions of decision-making power, people of color have a difficult time getting a fair shake, let alone getting ahead.”

And, as a University that prides itself on the various backgrounds of all those who attend it, USC must make an equal effort to ensure the names inside the brochures represent the faces of the students chosen to be on the outside. This would show students and faculty that the University cares and is serious about listening to the various cultural issues around the campus. Students will be confident that there are representatives who can understand the unique perspectives that make up this campus.

“Every committee should be transparent,” Caruso said in an interview with the Daily Trojan.  “How can you serve people if they don’t know who you are?”

However, the unmasking of those who “serve the people” and seeing that one of the most powerful committees at the University severely lacks the diversity of both race and gender makes one question whether USC cares about making an effort to change the representation within its own institution or whether they truly care about minority input at all.

There is no reason to have a nearly all-white executive board, especially one whose voices comprise mostly men. If anything, it only shows that the opinions and perspectives the University is trying to hear are only those of rich white men. There is no need for minority students to feel as if, institutionally, there is no space for the people who look like them.

If the University is to keep the executive committee this way, at least tell everyone why. If not, then, as the University begins a new chapter and attempts to correct some mishaps in its legacy, any executive committee whose job is to vote on the issues of this school — this school whose student population comprises of 16.5% Asians, 5.6% Black/African Americans, 14.8% Hispanics, 30.7% White/Caucasians and 23.9% international students — should be representative of the population it is voting for and discussing on behalf of.

Though changing the racial makeup of the Board will probably not help address the systematic corruption at USC, it will be a step in the right direction in changing the voices who are heard and the experiences that are understood at an institutional level. There are a plethora of wealthy, charitable Asian Americans, African Americans and Latinx Americans that the University could add to the committee if it so desired.

For example, Dr. Dre has a school and a building in his name, too. And with a net worth of $850 million, what makes him different than any of the others deemed worthy of a spot on the Board?

What, is it because he’s not a billionaire?