Porn vs. Policy

By Marc Korman.

It is a fact of legislative bodies that they spend too much time naming post offices, honoring sports teams, and naming state desserts. But for the past week, the Maryland General Assembly has found a whole new way to waste time, spending an unusual amount of time on porn.

By now the basic controversy is well known. The University of Maryland had a scheduled screening of an adult film, Pirates II: Stagnetti's Revenge. The screening was going to be coupled with a discussion of sexuality and pornography. State Senator Andy Harris, who did not have time to vote on the death penalty, found time to introduce an amendment to withhold operating funds from any Maryland public university showing an adult film outside of a classroom.

Of course, Republican senators in Annapolis say a lot and usually do not have much impact. But in this case Senate President Mike Miller announced his support for the Harris amendment and it snowballed into a major issue. The whole story has been well chronicled in the newspapers, but in the end part of the film was screened in a University lecture hall and Annapolis is moving forward with a requirement that Maryland public universities detail their policies on screening pornographic films.

I see two reasons to oppose the Harris effort. First, the amendment implicates First Amendment and education issues that need to be carefully considered. Public universities rely on the state for support and legislators should be paying attention to them. But they should not be micromanaging campus activities. Second, the amendment is the wrong debate at the wrong time.

State Senator Jamie Raskin led the effort against the legislature meddling in the screening, although even he could not resist claiming he had never seen a porno film. Right, just like every slots opponent has never gambled. But at least Senator Raskin stepped up and fought the legislature’s efforts to involve itself in determining acceptable and unacceptable educational content.

Some surprising individuals joined him as well. For example, Aaron Titus of the Maryland Coalition Against Pornography was quoted by the Post as saying the University’s reasons for cancelling the film screening were wrong and the debate should be about ideas, not dollars. Republican Senator EJ Pipkin, no friend of Andy Harris due to their Congressional primary campaign against each other, has asked if the legislature has anything better to do.

Let me offer an idea to Senator Pipkin, as well as Senators Harris and Miller. I am happy they are spending some time discussing the University of Maryland, but they should dedicate that time to matters more appropriate to the legislature, like funding. Last year, the Commission to Develop the Maryland Model for Funding Higher Education issued a report. As with most commission reports, it was promptly forgotten about. I read the report when it was issued and recall that it set specific targeting goals for tuition and financial aid to keep the Maryland system well funded, but also affordable so the state could be competitive not just with schools nationwide, but globally. One shortcoming of the report was that it did not offer much of a roadmap to reach those goals.

The General Assembly’s response to the report was a tuition freeze for the fourth year at public universities. The policy actually dates back to the Ehrlich Administration and makes a nice headline for elected officials. Unfortunately, it does not make good policy, especially when the state budget is in such disarray. Next year or the year after, a tuition increase will be necessary and when it comes we will see a major increase, possibly in the double digits percentagewise. The situation is analogous to the short sighted energy deregulation policy, where the state froze rates for approximately eight years and when the freeze ended, prices skyrocketed because they were being artificially held down. At the least, tuition needs to adjust for inflation.

If it were me, I would work towards a policy where tuition increases at a small percentage annually but financial aide programs are improved for those who cannot afford to pay. But there may be other answers out there the legislature can come to. But whatever the answer, that is the debate the General Assembly should be having regarding the University of Maryland, not what movies they screen on campus.

Disclosure: I am a student at the University of Maryland School of Law, which has not shown an adult film during my time there and is not covered by the tuition freeze.