The Daily Background

I talked with my college’s registrar again about the recruiting information story I’ve been writing about several times now (most recently here), and gotten some more good information. Thankfully the school did not charge money for my personal information they gave to the Marines (although the sale of personal information to the military is in fact legal under the Solomon Amendment).

The matter is still on my mind, but there seems very little I can do about it. Because of the sneaky way that the Solomon Amendment was written, I’d likely pay a future penalty from stopping the military from getting my personal information. Here’s the possible loophole I suggested, as I explained to my registrar in an email:

Does our school treat military recruiters in the same way in which it treats other potential employers? I mean, if for instance McDonalds called up and asked for a list of all the names of current students, their ages, what previous schools they graduated from, their phone numbers (cell phone, landline at college, and landline at home), their addresses, where they were born, what class level they’re in, what their academic major is, and what previous degrees they have received, would the school supply them with such directory information?

This may sound like a silly question (and it is), but the reason I ask is that according to the AACRAO (American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers) guide to the Solomon Amendment, schools can legally non-comply with the Solomon Amendment without risking losing federal funding, so long as they are treating military recruiters in the same fashion in which they treat other prospective employers.

You can read the AACRAO document I referenced here (PDF download, 668kb). Here’s the relevant section bold mine:

While all colleges are advised to comply with the Solomon Amendment since nearly all receive some kind of agency funding stipulated in the law, some schools need not do so. A school will not be in violation of Solomon if:

It can certify that in prohibiting access to campuses or students, it excludes other employees from recruiting on its campus, or that military recruiters have the same degree of access afforded other employers.

It permits employers to recruit on campus only in response to the expressed interest of students.

The military is given the same opportunities as other employers to inform students of their recruitment activities.

It certifies that too few students are interested to warrant accommodating military recruiters, applying the same criteria applicable to other employers.

The school does not collect or maintain some of the “Student Recruiting Information” elements prescribed by the final regulations—but the college must still provide the student recruiting information elements it does collect or maintain.

The covered school has a long-standing policy of pacifism based upon historical religious affiliation.

My suggestion was that if the school did not provide directory information to other prospective employers (and I have since verified that they don’t, and that the military is the only prospective employer that gets this type of information; McDonalds wouldn’t be afforded the same privilege), it could be argued that they were “giving the military the same opportunities as other employers” by not giving them a list, but by giving them whatever other opportunities are regularly available to employers.

It makes sense to me (I’m not a lawyer), and that’s the argument that I’d use, but the registrar has told me pretty much that the school doesn’t want to get into a fight with the government over the issue. Which is understandable, but it still irks me that the school could at least be trying a harder to stop giving the military personal information of students without having the school lose federal funding. In any case, it’s not a total loss-I think this has provided me with ample material for my next op-ed in Truthout or something.

Filed under: Z-TDB Blog