Editorial: Bill’s academic interference anti-American

Academic freedom ““ the driving concept behind the
mission of universities ““ is under attack in Congress.

Why? Because apparently universities are unfairly
anti-American.

A bill that has garnered little public debate or press coverage
would call for the government to more closely scrutinize
international and foreign language studies programs at American
schools. Having already passed unanimously in the House of
Representatives, if the bill becomes law it would establish a board
to monitor these programs, which could be threatened with reduced
funding if they are determined to be too anti-American.

In the post-Sept. 11, 2001 United States, millions of Americans
are ““ perhaps understandably ““ sensitive to criticism
of their government and its policies, especially when such
criticism seems unfair. But just because government officials, and
the powerful lobbyists and donors to whom they pander, don’t
like what some professors say about U.S. policy doesn’t mean
these officials can impose their will on academia.

The sponsors of the bill say they are defending the United
States from anti-American ideas. But the idea that the government
should play any type of oversight role in regulating public
discourse at universities is more typical of the Soviet Union than
of the United States.

Language changes made to the bill prevent the oversight board
from “mandating, directing or controlling” the
curriculum at universities. This means the infringement on academic
freedom is now less extreme than it had been. But the bill is still
unacceptable.

The members of the oversight board would be in a position to
offer Congress advice on how federal money should be allocated.
Title VI of the of the Higher Education Act supports area studies
and foreign language programs, which are provided with federal
funding. It’s clear these programs’ funding could be
threatened if they fail to live up to the standards of government
officials.

The bill’s sponsors say they are trying to protect
taxpayer money by ensuring it is not going to people who treat
their country too harshly. And the First Amendment of the
Constitution doesn’t restrict the government’s right to
pull funding. But this fashion of bullying runs against one of this
country’s most basic ideals: that freedoms to criticize,
question and petition the government are not only permissible,
they’re valuable and helpful.

Yes, universities are more harsh in their criticism of the
United States than other institutions. People at universities are
liberal. But the idea that the government has a responsibility
““ or even a right ““ to try to change that is
baseless. Universities are under no such obligation. (Neither is
talk radio or the Fox News channel.)

It’s plainly insulting that elected officials won’t
accept academics’ rights to express their own ideas and
opinions and to conduct research in a manner they see fit. If one
recalls, the research done by government agencies before the
invasion of Iraq was shoddy at best ““ and perhaps
dishonest.

Using a sentiment expressed recently by Rashid Khalidi of
Columbia University ““ who is the government to tell academia
its work is not good enough?