Rice-Eccles Stadium on the University of Utah campus in Salt Lake City is pictured on Monday, Jan. 15, 2024. (Photo by Spenser Heaps for Utah News Dispatch)
WASHINGTON — A GOP measure barring accrediting organizations from requiring colleges and universities to adopt diversity, equity and inclusion policies as a condition of accreditation passed the U.S. House Thursday, though its fate appears dim.
The End Woke Higher Education Act — which succeeded 213-201 — marks one of several so-called anti-woke initiatives and messaging bills from Republican lawmakers to hit the House floor this week.
The higher education measure, which drew fierce opposition from the Biden administration and major associations of colleges and universities, came amid a looming government shutdown deadline and in the heat of the 2024 campaign.
Four House Democrats voted in favor of the GOP measure, including Reps. Don Davis of North Carolina, Jared Golden of Maine, Mary Peltola of Alaska and Marie Gluesenkamp Perez of Washington.
Baked into the legislation are two bills introduced by Republican members of the U.S. House Committee on Education and the Workforce — the Accreditation for College Excellence Act and the Respecting the First Amendment on Campus Act.
Utah Rep. Burgess Owens, chairman of the Subcommittee on Higher Education and Workforce Development, introduced the Accreditation for College Excellence Act in May 2023, while New York Rep. Brandon Williams brought forth the Respecting the First Amendment on Campus Act in March.
In a statement to States Newsroom, Owens said “House Republicans passed the End Woke Higher Education Act to stand up for academic freedom, defend students’ constitutional rights, and ensure that colleges and universities aren’t forced to bend the knee to activist accreditors pushing political agendas as a condition for federal funding.”
The Utah Republican said the “Biden-Harris administration has injected its far-left ideology — Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion and Critical Race Theory — into every part of American life, including our higher education system.”
Owens’ bill says accreditation standards must not require, encourage or coerce institutions to support or oppose “a specific partisan, political, or ideological viewpoint or belief” or “set of viewpoints or beliefs on social, cultural, or political issues” or support “the disparate treatment of any individual or group of individuals.”
Meanwhile, Williams’ Respecting the First Amendment on Campus Act forces schools to disclose policies regarding free speech to students and faculty as a condition of receiving any Title IV funds.
Title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965 includes federal student financial aid programs.
Strong opposition
But the legislation is highly unlikely to be passed in the Democratic-controlled Senate.
The Biden administration also strongly opposed the measure, saying in a statement this week that the legislation would “micromanage both public and private institutions, undermining their ability to recognize and promote diversity.”
The legislation “would go beyond Congress’s traditional role in higher education with a wide range of confusing and unprecedented new mandates,” the administration added.
Rep. Bobby Scott — ranking member of the U.S. House Committee on Education and the Workforce — called the measure a “baseless attempt to inject culture wars into an ever-important accreditation process” during the floor debate Thursday.
The Virginia Democrat said the legislation “attempts to circumvent the First Amendment to establish a whole new scheme to regulate speech and association rights on campus outside of established precedents and practices.”
The GOP measure also drew the ire of leading associations of colleges and universities, who opposed the legislation both individually and collectively.
In a joint letter this week to House Speaker Mike Johnson of Louisiana and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries of New York, six major associations led by the American Council on Education took aim at Williams’ portion of the legislation, saying it “would undermine efforts to protect free speech on campus and provide safe learning environments free from discrimination.”