LEFT SIDE
College Compact: The Wrong Solution
Julian Rocky Capone
The Trump administration is once again attempting to “fix” higher education in a ham-fisted manner, forgetting the complexity of the situation. Their most recent memo invites 9 schools to join a compact after agreeing to their terms, after which the schools could then receive preferential funding in addition to other forms of special treatment. This shows a concerning pattern. The Trump administration seeks to gain further control over higher education, to push its own agenda under the guise of stabilizing university campuses after the last 5 years of turbulence.
Scenes of violence and disruption on university campuses have become commonplace over the last 5 years. This is, along with discussions about how their political climates are one-sided, or how schools have not taken into account whether or not they are fostering actual debate and challenging their students.
The memo from the Trump Administration pushes to end race and sex based admissions, freeze tuition for 5 years, and curb administrative costs for those that sign on, among other things, such as capping international undergrad enrollment at 15%. However, the most troubling issue is the administration's favourite talking point: a “friendly” political climate on campus.
While the concerns over campus antisemitism and stifling of conservative viewpoints are warranted, it does not mean that active involvement from the federal government is at all necessary, nor beneficial. Such action is setting a dangerous precedent: If a presidential administration can incentivize or threaten universities that choose to agree or disagree with their policies, what could the next logical step be? Not to say higher education needs to be free of federal regulation or oversight, but that an increase of any form of oversight threatens the whole system. Free speech and an open political climate are not things that can be forced; they are almost like a social contract, they require the willing action of all parties involved.
Nor are universities innocent either. Across America, universities have normalized administrative bloat, ignored legitimate issues of free speech, and even, in some cases, enabled activities in support of groups, such as Hamas, that use political violence. Yes, the system is in dire need of fixing, but promising a system of quid pro quo of funding for universities and colleges with a presidential administration in exchange for preferential treatment removes an important stopgap. Further overreach into academic affairs can only end with a further degradation of the system, both now and also when a more predatory administration could use the precedent of this legislation to further enforce its own will on higher education.
Americans need to make it clear that they are not happy with either group, the administration or the universities. While the memo does show an interest in attempting to solve the problems plaguing universities, it cannot be allowed to be put into use. Universities must maintain a degree of separation from the federal government and attempt to fix their own problems.
