Ron Paul’s Statement on HR 4137, the Higher Education Opportunity Act

August 1st, 2008 by Michael Nystrom
This comes via the speeches & statements section on Ron Paul’s Congressional website.
—–
Madame Speaker, anyone in need of proof that federal control follows
federal funding need only examine HR 4137, the Higher Education
Opportunity Act. HR 4137 imposes several new mandates on colleges, and
extends numerous mandates that previous Congress imposed on colleges.
HR 4137 proves the prophetic soundness of people who warned that
federal higher education programs would lead to federal control of
higher education.
Opponents of increasing federal control over higher education should
be especially concerned about HR 4137’s “Academic Bill of Rights.” This
provision takes a step toward complete federal control of college
curriculum, grading, and teaching practices. While this provision is
worded as a “sense of Congress,” the clear intent of the “bill of
rights” is to intimidate college administrators into ensuring
professors’ lectures and lesson plans meet with federal approval.
The “Academic Bill of Rights” is a response to concerns that
federally-funded institutions of higher learner are refusing to allow
students to express, or even be exposed to, points of view that differ
from those held by their professors. Ironically, the proliferation of
“political correctness” on college campuses is largely a direct result
of increased government funding of colleges and universities. Federal
funding has isolated institutions of higher education from market
discipline, thus freeing professors to promulgate their “politically
correct” views regardless of whether this type of instruction benefits
their students (who are, after all, the professors’ customers). Now, in
a perfect illustration of how politicians use the problems created by
previous interventions in the market as a justification for further
interventions, Congress proposes to use the problem of “political
correctness” to justify more federal control over college classrooms.
Instead of fostering open dialog and wide-raging intellectual
inquiry, the main effect of the “Academic Bill of Rights” will be to
further stifle debate about controversial topics. This is because many
administrators will order their professors not to discuss contentious
and divisive subjects in order to avoid a possible confrontation with
the federal government. Those who doubt this should remember that many
TV and radio stations minimized political programming in the sixties
and seventies in order to avoid running afoul of the federal “fairness
doctrine.”
I am convinced that some promoters of the “Academic Bill of Rights”
would be unhappy if, instead of fostering greater debate, this bill
silences discussion of certain topics. Scan the websites of some of the
organizations promoting the “Academic Bill of Rights” and you will also
find calls for silencing critics of the Iraq war and other aspects of
American foreign policy.
Madame Speaker, HR 4137 expands federal control over higher
education; in particular through an “Academic Bill of Rights” which
could further stifle debate and inquiry on America’s college campus.
Therefore, I urge my colleagues to reject this bill.