Although George W. Bush still has 762 days remaining before he leaves the Oval Office (assuming he is not impeached or struck down by an exasperated God in the interim), the search for a site for the Bush presidential library and service station is reaching a fever pitch. One potential locale is Southern Methodist University in Dallas. However, some faculty and alumni of the university have expressed concern about SMU hosting such, not just because of the President’s woeful policies but because of plans to create a conservative think tank within the library that would presumably seek to rewrite (or spin) the history of the Bush presidency.

From Inside Higher Ed:

Scholarly Archive or Ideological Center?

Southern Methodist University has long been considered the front-runner in the competition to be the site of President Bush’s presidential library. Laura Bush is an alumna and trustee. Dick Cheney was a trustee before being elected vice president. And the university’s main challenge — a lack of space — may have been fixed this month when SMU won a court fight over its right to demolish a condo complex the university had purchased, in part to have land for the Bush project.

But now, as President Bush prepares to decide among SMU, Baylor University and the University of Dallas, a new issue has emerged. Professors at SMU are circulating an open letter calling for the university to have a full discussion of the implications of being host to the Bush library. Several recent press reports have quoted Bush advisers as saying that SMU has the edge and that the library’s affiliated think tank will encourage scholarship with a specific political agenda.

An article in the New York Daily News — much discussed on the SMU campus — quotes a “Bush insider� as saying that the center would hire conservative scholars and “give them money to write papers and books favorable to the president’s policies.� Other articles have said that the center will be designed to spread the president’s ideas about “compassionate conservatism.�

Faculty critics say that although many of them disagree with Preside nt Bush’s policies, they would not object to a library-oriented archive and museum — and they say that in discussions with professors, the university has discussed a vision for such a Bush center. But creating an academic center with a specific goal of boosting the Bush image and agenda strikes many professors as antithetical to a university’s academic values.

A letter drafted in SMU’s theology school that organizers said was attracting support from dozens of professors in less than 48 hours states that “there are two distinct, irreconcilable visions� being put forth for the library — one for the campus and another for those being asked to contribute the hundreds of millions of dollars being raised for the project. “In the first vision, the library will be a neutral space. Using archived artifacts and documents from President Bush’s administration, scholars will do non-partisan, academic inquiry into his presidency. They will attempt objective, balanced assessment of the president’s thought, legacy and impact on our country and the world,� says the letter.

“In the second vision, the library will be a partisan space. Going by various terms, such as conservative think tank, institute or policy center, the library will hire conservative scholars to pursue a partisan agenda in favor of the president’s policies and programs.�

The letter doesn’t call for the university to withdraw from the competition, but to have a full discussion of the library’s goals — with the clear implication that the university must agree to be host only to a library without an agenda. The Bush administration’s record, the letter says, has seen “erosion of habeas corpus, denial of global warming, disrespect of international treaties, alienation of long-time U.S. allies, environmental predation, disregard for rights of gay persons, a pre-emptive war based on false premises, and other perceived disrespect for the created order and global community.� Such issues, the letter says, “beg for the kind of space� where “historians and scholars can fairly assess the years of George Bush’s presidency and its forms of impact on our nation and the entire globe.� [full text]