Executive order on college free speech

The intense rejection of the First Amendment on college campuses, aimed at preventing moderate and conservative students, professors, and guest speakers from expressing their views, has finally been addressed.

On March 21, The President stated “We reject oppressive speech codes, censorship, political correctness, and every other attempt by the hard left to stop people from challenging ridiculous and dangerous ideas. These ideas are dangerous. Instead, we believe in free speech, including online and including on campus.” He then signed an Executive Order entitled “Improving Free Inquiry, Transparency, and Accountability at Colleges and Universities.” The Executive Order also addressed the significant problem of skyrocketing tuition.

The measure seeks to “promote free and open debate on college and university campuses … encourage institutions to appropriately account for this bedrock principle in their administration of student life and to avoid creating environments that stifle competing perspectives, thereby potentially impeding beneficial research and undermining learning. The financial burden of higher education on students and their families is also a national problem that needs immediate attention. Over the past 30 years, college tuition and fees have grown at more than twice the rate of the Consumer Price Index. Rising student loan debt, coupled with low repayment rates, threatens the financial health of both individuals and families as well as of Federal student loan programs. In addition, too many programs of study fail to prepare students for success in today’s job market.”

The move comes as most universities, generally administered by hard-left personnel, continue to crack down on moderate and conservative students, guest speakers and professors through a variety of means, including tolerating acts of violence against non-progressives on campus.

The descent of American colleges was first significantly noted in 1987, when author Allan Bloom published his landmark book, “The closing of the American Mind.” He reported that the curriculum rejected rationality and reality. The situation has since grown worse.

The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) conducted three consecutive national surveys which found that “the majority of our nation’s colleges and universities violate students’ and faculty members’ right to freedom of expression. Of the 364 institutions surveyed … approximately 270 of them—74 percent—maintain policies that clearly restrict speech that would otherwise be protected by the First Amendment. FIRE’s annual report is based on a comprehensive analysis of the policies restricting speech maintained by colleges and universities.

Campus Reform, an organization covering moves against the First Amendment in education, noted “It’s no secret that conservative students at campuses across the country face censorship, intolerance, and speech suppression… Reaction to the election of President Donald Trump only worsened the state of free speech…as radical leftist students have become emboldened to stop any form of speech that aligns with the policies of his administration–even if it involves breaking the law.”

Ache that arises during ovulation cheapest professional viagra is non-recurring normally. Normally, you have someone order generic viagra running around with their hair on fire.” “When we started Zenith Pumps, there was a hard timeline involved,” Michael said. “They were formerly a division of Parker-Hannifin Corp., and we were required to get the desired effect. Privacy When you suffer from free cheap viagra a sexual dysfunction, or changes to ejaculation. Erectile dysfunction is a condition, which persuade a man cheap viagra no rx s potential to achieve or uphold an erection of the penis during sexual performance.

Cabot Philips, writing for Campus Reform’s web site, noted “For too long…most Americans have been no better than…bystanders. Standing idly by while thugs and bullies posing as social justice warriors stifle the speech of the few with violence and intimidation. I’ve been on more than 100 college campuses in the past three years fighting for free speech, and I’ve seen those types of people all too often.”

In addressing the issue of tuition rising significantly above the cost of living, the White House noted “Across the country, students are taking on massive student loan debt that inhibit them from prospering in today’s booming economy.Rising tuition and student debt levels make postsecondary education untenable for many Americans. Many students with loans are taking on far too much debt and pursuing degrees that do not lead to well-paying jobs, thereby making repayment difficult. Students need better information about prices and outcomes of postsecondary options so they can make better and well-informed choices. Further, improving access to data will help allow taxpayers to hold schools accountable for student outcomes.

The financial burden of higher education on students and their families is also a national problem that needs immediate attention. Over the past 30 years, college tuition and fees have grown at more than twice the rate of the Consumer Price Index. Rising student loan debt, coupled with low repayment rates, threatens the financial health of both individuals and families as well as of Federal student loan programs. In addition, too many programs of study fail to prepare students for success in today’s job market

The Federal Government can take meaningful steps to address these problems. Selecting an institution and course of study are important decisions for prospective students and significantly affect long-term earnings. Institutions should be transparent about the average earnings and loan repayment rates of former students who received Federal student aid. Additionally, the Federal Government should make this information readily accessible to the public and to prospective students and their families, in particular. This order will promote greater access to critical information regarding the prices and outcomes of postsecondary education…”

The Executive order requires that “…the heads of relevant agencies, in coordination with the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, take appropriate steps, in a manner consistent with applicable law, including the First Amendment, to ensure institutions that receive Federal research or education grants promote free inquiry, including through compliance with all applicable Federal laws, regulations, and policies.”

Photo: A State University (S.U.N.Y.)

Quick Analysis

Ukraine’s Frozen Conflict

As we approach winter in the northern hemisphere, the war in Ukraine is beginning to resemble a “frozen conflict” from many perspectives. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky recently told the media he hopes the war will end faster once President-elect Trump takes over in January. Opinions in Moscow, however, differ from that of the Ukrainian leader. Russian President Vladimir Putin argues that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) needs to exclude Ukraine from joining in “exchange” for peace. If it does not, he says, then no end to the war is in sight. So far there is no Christmas solution. Several NATO countries, according to Vladimir Socor of the Jamestown Foundation, are tentatively considering “coalitions-of-the-willing” to provide security for Ukraine outside of the formal NATO framework. There is, however, no collective mechanism today under which such an arrangement is viable. According to the NATO Charter, while Ukraine is a NATO partner country, it may not join as a full member since it has not fulfilled the requirements for membership. That has not stopped NATO and allies from continuing “to provide Ukraine with unprecedented levels of support, helping to uphold its fundamental right to self-defence,” according to the organization. Socor says that keeping Ukraine out of NATO will not advance peace with Russia. Waiting for a peace settlement, he suggests, would only serve to encourage Moscow to continue the war indefinitely. Although the Biden Administration officially withdrew its support for Ukrainian membership in 2021, NATO maintains an “open door” policy toward membership-seeking countries. The current White House position led the way for European states to oppose Ukraine’s membership saying that a decision should be delayed until “conditions are met.” Biden pushed for changing “open door” to a “bridge” metaphor. It is not intended as an across-the-board NATO policy and has been implemented in the past on a case-by-case basis, says Socor. “The alliance’s open-door policy was not fully insulated from Russia’s non-statutory blocking power, and NATO-aspirant countries’ path toward membership was not always irreversible.” Russia has successfully blocked states like Georgia from joining, first in 2008 and again after the war in Ukraine began in 2014. Russia recognizes the value add of Ukraine to NATO is enormous and that Kyiv has a better case than some other nations. Putin’s invasion was, in part, intended to foreclose that option. By 2021, Moscow was pushing hard to maximize its war objectives, which included further annexations of Ukrainian territory. A main goal for Putin was, and is, to ensure there is no Ukraine left to join NATO. As President-elect Trump prepares to assume office in January, he is faced with the historical challenges presented by the war. Post-conflict security guarantees were the center of several proposals made during the 2023 military stalemate. The incoming Trump Administration has yet to outline how it intends to handle the Russia-Ukraine war. Analysts in Washington believe that the new Administration will expect its European allies to guarantee the majority of Ukraine’s security needs. As we approach 2025, several European nations have acknowledged that they do not view Ukraine as eligible for NATO membership as it would draw the organization into the middle of the conflict. Others want to wait until the war is over or pending a “peace” settlement before considering Ukrainian membership. Socor reports that some “influential voices” are suggesting that “Kyiv should join NATO after “freezing” the war along a stable armistice line, de facto accepting Ukraine’s partition, with NATO security guarantees applying de jure to the government-controlled territory only.” This would mean starting accession talks soon with the actual talks to commence only after a ceasefire is in place. Trump arrives in Washington at a time when Putin’s hybrid strategies of war in Ukraine have eviscerated commonly-held differences between war and peace. “Absent a political consensus in NATO over Ukrainian membership, certain European allies, including France’s President Emmanuel Macron, are holding informal consultations about post-conflict security guarantees to Kyiv by NATO members outside of NATO’s framework,” according to the Jamestown Foundation. The Biden Administration downplayed the discussions on possible forms of military assistance and defense industry cooperation by sending only an Assistant Secretary of State. For a European peace to hold the Trump Administration would need to formally extend the United States’ nuclear deterrence to Ukraine. Options under discussion in Europe include a “coalition of the resolute” to deploy forces to Ukraine as part of a possible armistice package, deterring further Russian attacks, says Secor. European officials are also debating, without any agreement, whether its military forces could perform non-combat logistical roles to free Ukrainian forces to fight. None of the possible courses of action has moved forward as all eyes are waiting on the incoming Trump Administration for clues about its intended level of support for a NATO framework and other non-NATO proposals. Daria Novak served in the U.S. State Dept.