2. HIGHLIGHTS FROM COUNCIL ACTIONS: 2002–4

From 2002 to 2004, the ASA Council took action on a range of issues important to sociology and the Association, including (1) issuing statements and resolutions on collecting data on race and ethnicity, (2) signing amicus briefs, (3) voting resolutions stating ASA policies based on member initiatives, and (4) approving other important changes relating to ASA policies and procedures (e.g., on investments, awards, and gifts).

Data on Race and Ethnicity

Statement on Race
The Association took several important initiatives in recent years that emphasize the need for collecting and using data on race and ethnicity to advance sociology and public discourse on social policy. Established by ASA Council in January 2000, the Task Force on the Statement on Race was asked “to craft an ASA statement on race that reflects and draws upon sociological knowledge and expertise.” The members of the Task Force were Troy Duster (Chair), Diane Brown (Council Liaison), Manuel de la Puente, Bette J. Dickerson, Deborah K. King, Sharon M. Lee, Felice J. Levine, Suzanne Model, Michael Omi, Willie Pearson, Jr., Ivan Allen, C. Matthew Snipp, Roberta M. Spalter-Roth (ASA Executive Offi ce Staff Liaison), Edward Telles, Hernan Vera, Lynn Weber, David Wellman, David R. Williams, and J. Milton Yinger.

The ASA Council Statement on “The Importance of Collecting Data and Doing Social Scientific Research on Race,” based on the Task Force Report, was presented at a press conference at the 2002 Annual Meeting in Chicago. In introducing the work of the Task Force, President Barbara Reskin and Executive Officer Sally Hillsman reiterated ASA’s strong commitment to the value and importance of sociological research on race, and to the importance of collecting sound data to enable that process.

Troy Duster, the Chair of the Task Force, emphasized the importance of collecting data on race as fundamental to research on the causes and consequences of racial disparities across a wide spectrum of social institutions. He noted that, not to have data on race would preserve the status quo with respect to racial disparities in areas such as health care, labor markets, communities, and schools.

California Proposition 54
The ASA Statement on Race was cited by Council as strong and persuasive empirical evidence for taking a formal position on Proposition 54 in the California election of October 7, 2003. Council voted unanimously to approve a statement which urged California voters to vote “No” to Proposition 54 (“The Classification by Race, Ethnicity, Color and National Origin [CRECNO]”), which if “approved, would eliminate the ability of California citizens to hold both their state and local governments as well as private entities accountable regarding prohibitions against discrimination on the basis of race, ethnicity, and national origin. Researchers would lack the data to inform policymakers on this critical issue. ASA urges California voters to allow their governmental entities to collect the necessary data to support evidentiary research on race, ethnicity, and national origin.” (Council Minutes, August 20, 2003)

Congressional Briefing
In addition to Council actions, an ASA Congressional briefing on “Racial and Ethnic Data: Why we Collect it; How We Use It in Public Policy,” sponsored by the Spivack Program, was held on May 28, 2003. A panel of experts, including the Hon. Thomas C. Sawyer (former U.S. Rep. from Ohio) (moderator), Troy Duster, Brian Smedley (Institute of Medicine/The National Academies), and Gerald R. Sanders (Virtual Capital of California, and former San Diego Police Chief) addressed key issues relating to the importance of data on race for policy across a wide number of areas (Appendix 25).

Defense of Scientific Integrity

From 2002 to 2004, several actions taken by the federal government raised serious challenges to the social sciences and to the integrity of the scientific process. Council responded to these situations by passing resolutions placing it on record as strongly objecting to these violations and intrusions by political processes in areas vital to fields of science. As it has done since the 1980s, ASA continued to work in close collaboration with COSSA and other professional and scientific organizations in responding to these situations.

Peer-Review Process
On August 20, 2003, Executive Officer Hillsman reported to Council on an initiative by two members of Congress to defund five National Institutes of Health (NIH) behavioral and social science grants which had been approved in a peer-reviewed process. Four of the five grants under assault addressed aspects of sexual behavior and function. The proposed legislation was defeated by only two votes in the House of Representatives, despite considerable efforts of COSSA, the ASA and other scientific organizations to educate and inform the members of Congress on the significance of the peer-review process for scientific research in all fields. Hillsman noted that an assault on scientific peer review had also occurred in 1991 and 1992 (see Chapter 2), and recommended that Council again take action opposing any attempts to restrict funding for high quality, peer reviewed research.

Council voted unanimously to approve the following statement: “The American Sociological Association strongly opposes any action by Congress that would restrict the ability of the National Institutes of Health to fund high quality, peer-reviewed research and affirms its support for the ability of NIH to support high quality, public health related research on sexual function and sexual behavior…The ASA considers [such actions] to be a serious threat to the integrity of the peer review process and the independence of scientific thought, and represents political intrusion into scientific research. We direct the Executive Office to oppose such actions publicly and to take all appropriate steps to help ensure these studies are not de-funded.” (Council Minutes, August 20, 2003)

Appointments to Scientific Organizations
Discussion in Council in August 18, 2004 reflected grave concerns in the science community regarding the U.S. Government’s disregard for the independent role of scientific research, particularly as manifested in policies on Executive branch appointments to scientific advisory bodies, and U.S. Government vetting of scientists in international scientific roles. As a result of this situation, the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) engaged in a major effort to develop a report (the third since 1992) on how to improve the process of presidential appointments of scientists to advisory committees and policy positions within federal agencies (the report was to be released after the fall 2004 elections). In addition to the comment to NAS prepared by COSSA, ASA Council approved a statement to be issued on behalf of ASA on this issue. Council also voted to make a public statement on the related issue of government vetting of scientists for international bodies, and to bring this statement to the attention of the National Academy Board on International Science Organizations.

In May 2004, ASA also joined more than 30 other American organizations in science, engineering and higher education in signing a Statement and Recommendations on Visa Problems Harming America’s Scientific, Economic, and Security Interests . This action was taken in response to the increasingly negative consequences to higher education of recent changes to U.S. visa policies.

Amicus Briefs

The Association joined in two important amicus briefs in 2003 and 2004: Grutter v. Bollinger ([02-241] [288 F.3d 732, affirmed.]); and Faulkner v. National Geographic Society (294 F. Supp. 523 [S.D.N.Y. 2003]):

Grutter v. Bollinger
The case involved the University of Michigan Law School, which followed an official admissions policy that sought to achieve student body diversity through compliance with the Bakke case. The Michigan Law School admissions policy looked beyond factors such as undergraduate grade point average and Law School Admissions Test score in order to ensure that a “critical mass” of underrepresented minority students is accepted for enrollment at its Law School. When the Law School denied admission to Barbara Grutter, a white Michigan resident with an outstanding academic record, Grutter filed suit alleging that she had been discriminated against on the basis of race in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment and the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The case was eventually appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court which held that the Michigan Law School’s “narrowly tailored use of race in admissions decisions to further a compelling interest in obtaining the educational benefits that flow from a diverse student body is not prohibited by the Equal Protection Clause or the Civil Rights Act of 1964.”

Former ASA President Barbara Reskin led the efforts to prepare an ASA amicus brief in support of the Michigan policy. The ASA brief (also signed by the Association of Black Sociologists, the Law and Society Association, the Society for the Study of Social Problems, and Sociologists for Women in Society) argued that an extensive body of research by social scientists demonstrated that race and ethnicity profoundly affect the life chances of individuals and how they are treated in society.

The brief argued that because race shapes experiences of individuals and is a “defining life experience, universities have a compelling interest in considering race when selecting students…Research has established that considering race among many other factors produces graduates of all races who become leaders in law, medicine, science, and public life. Declaring student’s race out of bounds in admissions decisions would deny admissions officers crucial information to contextualize other life experiences and accurately measure academic performance.” (No. 02-241:4)

Faulkner v. National Geographic Society
In 2004, ASA joined JSTOR in an amicus brief in the appeal of Faulkner v. National Geographic Society . This case is one of a series that had been filed in recent years by freelance writers and photographers objecting to reproduction of their work in extended electronic forms. The writers and photographers generally contend that publication of original print works containing their pieces in other, generally electronic, formats (such as a CD-ROM) constituted a “revision” of the original publication, and therefore violates the original copyright.

JSTOR approached a number of professional associations in 2003 about joining as co-signatories on its amicus curiae brief in the Faulkner case. The central issue for ASA was that, since ASA holds the copyright for its journal content, it should not be required to obtain a new copyright when it made this content available online, for example, in JSTOR type formats. Executive Officer Hillsman, the Secretary, Secretary-Elect, and the three ASA Presidents (current, Elect, and Immediate Past) consulted with the ASA legal counsel on whether to join in the amicus brief. On June 22nd, 2004, EOB voted unanimously to authorize the ASA to join in the amicus curiae brief submitted by JSTOR to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. ASA Council supported this decision.

Member Resolutions

War in Iraq
A member-initiated resolution against the U.S. Government’s invasion of Iraq was proposed in the spring of 2003 by a group of ASA members called Sociologists and Political Scientists Without Borders. The resolution was signed by more than three percent of the Association’s voting membership, therefore requiring Council under the ASA Bylaws to present the resolution to the full membership for a vote if Council did not endorse it. ASA Council took up the member resolution in a meeting held by conference call on March 31, 2003. Council decided to publish the resolution with contextual material in Footnotes (April 2003) and on the ASA homepage in preparation for submitting it to a vote of the full ASA membership. In the spring 2003 ballot, members were given the option to vote on the member resolution, and also to register their views on the war via an opinion question on the ballot. The resolution against the war passed by 66 percent of the voting membership—thus placing the ASA on record against the war in Iraq. In a separate question, 75 percent of the voting membership responded affirmatively to the question “do you call for an immediate end to the war against Iraq?“

On August 19, 2003, ASA Council considered the complaint of James Tucker of New Hampshire and some other ASA members alleging that the member resolution adopted by Council was in violation of ASA’s Code of Ethics. Executive Officer Hillsman reported that “COPE had met to examine this complaint and found that it did not meet the standards set out for filing a complaint under the official COPE policies and procedures.” Council directed that a letter summarizing the COPE decision and the discussion in Council be sent to Tucker.

Ban on Gay Marriage
On March 26, 2004, a member-initiated resolution was submitted to ASA on a proposed amendment to the U.S. Constitution to prohibit same sex marriage. The Caucus of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender Sociologists, the ASA Family Section, and the ASA Sexualities Section jointly sponsored the resolution that was signed by more than three percent of ASA voting members. Council met by conference call on April 7, 2004 to consider the resolution, voiced strong support for it, and voted unanimously to submit the resolution directly to the ASA membership on the 2004 annual ballot.

A large majority of voting members (75 percent) responded affirmatively when asked, “Do you endorse the membership resolution opposing a constitutional amendment prohibiting same sex marriage?” Recognizing that some members might be opposed to amending the U.S. Constitution to prohibit same sex marriage but would endorse other legislation to ban same sex marriage, Council also voted unanimously to place a separate opinion question on the ASA ballot: “Do you personally favor or oppose legislation that bans same sex marriage?” A large majority (79 percent) of ASA voting members responded that they opposed such legislation. Kalleberg reported that under the ASA Bylaws, the member resolution is now the official position of the Association (Council Minutes, August 17, 2004).

Business Meeting Resolutions, August 2004
Members also introduced two resolutions during the Business Meeting of the ASA Annual Meeting on August 17, 2004. The first resolution on “Graduate Students as Employees,” affirmed the rights of graduate students and research assistants to unionize. A motion was introduced for Council approval of this resolution as Council position. After debate on the issue, Council voted to accept the resolution in principle recognizing graduate students and teaching assistants as employees. Several members of Council “asked that the minutes reflect that this is a decision of the ASA Council and does not imply support of the membership for this resolution.” (Council Minutes, August 17, 2004)

A second resolution on “Labor and ASA Conventions,” called on the Association to adopt a policy of union preference in negotiating hotel and service contracts for all meetings organized by the Association. President Burawoy summarized for Council the complexities involved in site selection for meetings, and a consensus emerged that a vote on this issue should be deferred pending consultation with ASA legal counsel.

Other Council Actions/Policy Issues

Collaboration with Aligned and Regional Associations
As noted in Chapters 1 and 2, ASA has placed a high priority on nurturing collaborative efforts with aligned organizations and in developing a strong working relationship with regional, state, and other sociological associations. Appendix 28 contains a list of organizations (including the regional, state, and aligned associations) with which ASA maintains close ties.

In August 2004, Executive Officer Hillsman noted that an ASA priority continues to be “outreach to the aligned associations, looking to the Centennial as an opportunity to embrace the diversity of the sociological community. She commended Michael Burawoy for his outreach effort to the regional and state associations in preparation for the 2004 Annual Meeting.” (Council Minutes, August 18, 2004)

In 2004, as part of its preparation for its Centennial year, the Association undertook a project to extend collaboration with state, regional, and aligned sociological associations by broadening the Sorokin lectures. Established by ASA in 1967 with a $10,000 gift from Pitirim Sorokin, the winner of the ASA Distinguished Scholarly Publication Award was invited to present the Sorokin Lecture at a regional sociological association meeting. However, as regional meetings grew in size and complexity, it was apparent that the audience for the ASA Sorokin lecture could be broadened.

In August 2004, Council voted unanimously to expand and revise the current Sorokin Lecture into the ASA Award Winning Sociologists Sorokin Lecture Series, in which any of the winners of major ASA awards in the past two calendar years could be asked to deliver a lecture at a state, regional, or aligned sociological association meeting, or on a campus. The Sorokin Fund and the American Sociological Fund will provide support for up to four such lecture trips in a calendar year beginning in ASA’s Centennial Year in 2005 (Council Minutes, August 17, 2004).

Collaborations with Federal Science Policy-Focused Associations
The Association also worked closely with the COSSA (the Consortium of Social Science Associations of which ASA is a founding member), the Coalition for the Advancement of Health Through Behavioral and Social Science Research (CAHT-BSSR), the Coalition for National Science Funding (CNSF), the Decade of Behavior (ASA is represented formally on both the staff committee and advisory committee), the Behavioral and Social Science Coordinating Committee at the National Institutes of Health (BSSR-CC), BSSR-COSSA (coordinated by staff of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy to keep the research community abreast of issues affecting behavioral and social science research), the Council of Professional Associations on Federal Statistics (COPAFS), the National Humanities Alliance (NHA), and the Coalition for Health Funding. These collaborations help ASA and its Executive Office keep abreast of science issues in the federal policy arena, and when necessary, take collective action on matters of concern to the social sciences. The Executive Officer regularly reports to the ASA Council on these matters and provides Council with the necessary background information to take action as needed.

Changes in ASA Investment Strategies
During 2003 and 2004, led by Secretary Arne Kalleberg, the EOB undertook a comprehensive review of the Association’s investment policy and portfolio. As of June 30, 2004, the Association had about $7.1 million in long-term assets invested in a balanced portfolio of fixed income and equity investments managed by Fiduciary Trust International, Inc. Approximately 57 percent of the long-term assets invested by the Association are funds owned by ASA, and may be used by it for whatever purposes Council deems appropriate. The remaining 43 percent are held by the Association and invested on behalf of donors (e.g., the Sorokin Fund, the American Sociological Fund), and may be used by the Association only in accordance with the donors’ restrictions.

In January 2004, the EOB interviewed potential new managers on investment strategies, and also created an Investment Committee consisting of Secretary Kalleberg, Michael Aiken, Paul DiMaggio, Lois DeFleur, and Franklin Wilson, and staffed by Executive Officer Sally Hillsman and Controller Les Briggs. Secretary Kalleberg presented an extensive report to ASA Council of EOB’s findings and decisions on August 17, 2004. EOB concluded that moving ASA’s assets toward far greater diversification as well as using a passive investment strategy would be advantageous to ASA, and selected an investment manager for these funds who invested exclusively in the very large portfolio of mutual funds developed by Dimensional Fund Advisors (DFA).

A priority issue for EOB in analyzing investment strategies and evaluating potential investment advisors was ASA Council’s concern since the 1980s with ensuring socially responsible investing.

EOB concluded that a passive investment strategy utilizing DFA mutual funds would be consistent with ASA’s past position on socially responsible investing, and presented a detailed rationale for its position to Council. ASA Council voted strong support for EOB’s decision, finding these actions to be in keeping with its position on responsible investing of ASA funds (Council Minutes of August 17, 2004).

Gifts and Awards
Following his death in 2003, the family of William “Si” Goode, the 63rd President of the American Sociological Association in 1972, offered to make a substantial contribution to the ASA in support of a dissertation grant in his memory. In January 2004, Council voted to accept the gift and establish a competitive travel grant for a PhD candidate conducting cross-cultural or comparative dissertation research to be administered by the Executive Office until the funds are exhausted.

A new award in honor of Lewis A. Coser was also established by the ASA Theory Section in 2004 with gifts from his many friends and colleagues. The Lewis A. Coser Award for Theoretical Agenda-Setting will be bestowed on an annual basis to “a mid-career sociologist whose work…holds great promise for setting the agenda in the field of sociology” and exemplifies the “sociological ideals Coser represented.” The award is intended to be a prestigious discipline-wide award “that reinforces the centrality of theory in the discipline of sociology.” (ASA homepage) The recipient will receive a financial award and present the Lewis A. Coser Award Lecture at a section session at the ASA Annual Meeting in the following year.

In 2003, at the urging of then President Michael Burawoy (and over the objections of the Committee on Awards), Council established a new ASA honorific award, the “Distinguished Coverage of Social Issues in the Media,” and referred it to the ASA Committee on Awards to develop the criteria and process for nominations and selections. The first such award is to be made at the 2005 Annual Meeting.

Governance: ASA Council Bylaws Changes

In February 2003, Council voted to make changes to the Bylaws in order to clarify certain sections, resolve inconsistencies and other technical problems, and update certain provisions in light of new forms of communication (Footnotes , May 2003:28–9). (See Appendix 15.)

With the 2003 election, members were offered for the first time the option to vote electronically via the Internet or to cast their votes by paper ballot as they have done in the past. The Council minutes of August 19, 2003 indicate that a majority of members (54 percent) voted via the Internet.