Secret payments are corrupt even when UConn teams win

By CHRIS POWELL

Secret payments are contradictions of open, accountable, and democratic government. They are the essence of government corruption. 

Yet last year the General Assembly and Governor Lamont authorized such secrecy. Why? Because it was sought by the University of Connecticut, which is often considered the fourth branch of state government and entitled to whatever it wants.

---

Medicaid could be reduced; and deliver the voter rolls

Lamont’s ‘unfinished business’ shouldn’t wait for another term

Economizing in schools is illegal; and four years of paid leave drag on

---

UConn’s rationale for secret payments was ridiculous.

At issue are the de-facto salaries that UConn, like many other schools, has begun paying its varsity student-athletes amid the professionalization of college sports. That professionalization may be fair but it is destroying respect for the college game. The secrecy claimed by UConn will corrupt it.

At UConn’s request the legislature and governor enacted an exemption to Connecticut’s freedom-of-information law for the payments made by the university to varsity student-athletes as part of sports revenue sharing and for use of their “name, image, and likeness” in advertising. The university says it will disclose the total of these payments and the number of student-athletes receiving them but not individual payments.    

“This exemption,” UConn Athletic Director David Benedict told the legislature, “will allow student-athletes to maintain their privacy, increase compensation opportunities, and avoid the competitive disadvantages that would occur if Connecticut universities were required to share contract details.”

Privacy? How can there be privacy for student-athletes who play before huge crowds, often on television, become the subjects of news reports about their performance, and are followed and admired by millions? 

How can there be privacy for student-athletes who hope to parlay their publicity into even more lucrative opportunities in commercial endorsements and the big leagues?

Actual privacy would kill college sports and student-athlete careers.

As for “competitive disadvantages” to UConn if its payments to student-athletes are disclosed, the same argument could be made in respect to all other government employees in Connecticut, whose salaries, thankfully, have not yet been concealed in the name of “privacy.” Everyone in government might like his salary to be secret. The government itself might like it too, since concealing salaries and other payments would prevent ordinary accountability.

For example, UConn might not want the public to know how its payments to men and women student-athletes compare, nor how payments among members of the same team compare, lest the public sense bad judgment, unfairness, or nepotism and demand answers.

UConn doesn’t want to conceal its payments to student-athletes for their sake but for its own.

The university’s new exemption from FOI law will facilitate unfairness, unaccountability, and corruption and be a disastrous precedent. The legislature and the governor should repeal it. Corrupt will be corrupt no matter how many games UConn teams win.

THE UNREAL McCOY: Having given up on politics across the state line, former New York Lt. Gov. Betsy McCaughey — pronounced “McCoy” — has declared her candidacy for the Republican nomination for governor of Connecticut, where she grew up and to which she has returned, insofar as Greenwich is technically still part of the state.

McCaughey’s political life has been erratic. Her governor in New York, George Pataki, a Republican, dumped her, whereupon she became a Democrat and challenged him, only to lose the Democratic primary and then run on the Liberal Party line with even less success. She has supported President Trump and lately has hosted a program on the conservative cable television network Newsmax.

There is speculation that with Trump’s endorsement McCaughey could win the Republican primary for governor, whereupon Trump’s enthusiasm for her would doom her in the election but might win her a job in Washington.

In any case McCaughey’s opening gambit is tedious. She pledges to repeal Connecticut’s income tax, which raises about half state government’s revenue. Voters have dismissed such pledges before, since they are easy to make and impossible to fulfill without massive cuts in state and municipal spending.

Specifying such cuts is where McCaughey should start if she wants to be taken seriously, and even then it will be hard.

---

Chris Powell has written about Connecticut government and politics for many years. (CPowell@cox.net)