Ilya Shapiro and Chris Rufo of the Manhattan Institute recently wrote an opinion piece published in the Wall Street Journal where they called for legislators to reform higher education through a list of reform proposals that started with abolishing “diversity, equity and inclusion” (DEI) offices.
Shapiro serves as the director of constitutional studies and Rufo is the Manhattan Institute’s director of the initiative on critical race theory. The list of four reform proposals was put together with the Manhattan Institute along with the Goldwater Institute. The first proposal of abolishing DEI offices is because they say they are against free speech. They also said they “fuel administrative bloat” in the university system.
“Abolish 'diversity, equity and inclusion' bureaucracies,” Shapiro and Rufo wrote. “These offices work actively against norms of academic freedom and truth-seeking, advance primarily political aims and fuel administrative bloat that raises costs and exacerbates student debt. Administrators at public institutions should maintain official neutrality on controversial political questions extraneous to the business of educating students. Leave compliance with federal and state civil rights laws to the university counsel’s office.”
The second proposal was to stop mandatory diversity training for staff, faculty and students. They claim that the training is often listed as voluntary but ends up being required for other roles, as far as staff goes, in areas like hiring committees. They said training on “micro-aggressions” and “implicit bias” do not align with the mantra of being treated equally. They also wrote that it “indoctrinates an ideology of identity based grievance, guilt and division.”
The third proposal is for universities to “curtail the use of diversity statements.” They argue that these are being used as a “litmus test” for whether faculty applicants adhere to a political agenda. The op-ed brings up that the Supreme Court decided that no “loyalty oaths” should be required in public education, but adds that many universities use DEI statements to require candidates to say certain things. Shapiro and Rufo claimed that universities have eliminated candidates based on said statements.
The last proposal suggests universities should “end racial and other identity-based preferences.” They said no institution should discriminate based on sex, race or national origin. The op-ed adds that adopting these proposal would lead institutions toward “exploring intellectual ideas” instead of “fearing the thought police.”
The Texan reported that Rep. Car Tepper (R-Lubbock) filed a bill in the Texas House of Representatives in December that would ban DEI offices at Texas public universities. The bill includes having universities “demonstrate commitment to intellectual freedom and viewpoint diversity” under the 14th Amendment.
“When it comes to public dollars, I think it’s pretty clear that we must be viewpoint neutral,” Tepper said.
State Rep. Ron Reynolds (D-Missouri City) was against the bill, saying “This session should be focused on providing them more resources, not taking them away. DEI (diversity, equity and inclusion) is essential to continue cultivating environments where all students and faculty feel represented and supported.”
Reynolds is the chair of the Texas Legislative Black Caucus.
Previous reporting by the Austin Journal in September 2022 found the University of Texas at Austin has a DEI Office and a Strategic Plan for Faculty Diversity, Equity and Inclusivity (DEI) that was created in April of 2021. The report cited an American Enterprise Institute study that found DEI statements are becoming more common among faculty positions in higher education. Public information requests obtained by Austin Journal showed the University of Texas at Austin had a FY 2021-2022 budget of over $8 million for the “Division of Diversity and Community Engagement,” which includes almost $500,000 toward the “Office for Inclusion and Equity.”