The president of Harvard says they should stand firm
Why cut off research funding? Harvard University is a first priority for the U.S. government, and the Trump administration has threatened further discrimination
Harvard University’s leader says that they need to stand up for what’s best for the nation and double down on their commitment to it.
Trump has also threatened the school’s tax-exempt status and last week, the administration revoked Harvard’s ability to admit international students. The judge issued a temporary restraining order after the school sued.
“Why cut off research funding? It hurts Harvard because the research funding is not a gift, and also it hurts the country because it is high priority work for the federal government.
As evidence of how his university’s work directly benefits the U.S. public, Garber points to recent honors awarded to Harvard faculty by the Breakthrough Prize, known as “The Oscars of Science,” for their work on obesity and diabetes drugs and gene editing, used to correct disease-causing genetic variations.
The University of Maryland, which has been diligently addressing antisemitism and viewpoint diversity, has done a great job over the past year
Alan Garber: In my view, the federal government is saying that we need to address antisemitism in particular, but it has raised other issues, and it includes claims that we lack viewpoint diversity. We have been very clear that we think we do have issues, and I would particularly emphasize the speech issues. We think it’s a real problem, if – particularly a research university’s – students don’t feel free to speak their minds, when faculty feel that they have to think twice before they talk about the subjects that they’re teaching. That’s a real issue that we need to address. It’s concerning when people think their views are unpopular. And the administration and others have said conservatives are too few on campus and their views are not welcome. In so far as that’s true, that’s a problem we really need to address.
Over that time, there has been tremendous division on the campus. There are faculty and students who disagreed with one another about what the university should do. But the main purpose of that report was to identify the problems that we face, particularly with regard to our Jewish and Israeli students. Some of the recommendations that we had already adopted are still being worked on. But I do believe that we have a real problem in this regard, or we had a real problem. We have done a lot to address it and we will continue to work at it.
Inskeep: In the letter cutting off your ability to host international students, the Department of Homeland Security made a number of accusations, including that Harvard, brazenly refused to provide information that was demanded about international students and that you also “ignored a follow up question about them.” Is either of those statements true?
Garber: To the best of my knowledge, they are not true. I need to add, by the way, that this is clearly the subject of litigation, as you pointed out earlier. So we have endeavored to comply fully in line with the law.
In response to allegations from the administration that the university has failed to protect Jewish students on campus, Garber said the school has made substantial and real progress over the past year.
Is Harvard really worth what you’re talking about? Inskeep: Why do international students participate in cancer research at Harvard? How do you want to help?
Inskeep asks if that’s an example of what you’re attempting to do in a large way. You want people to engage with each other civilly, but you also want to allow all sorts of ideas.
Garber: Exactly. We want people to talk about difficult topics when they don’t agree. We shouldn’t be in an echo chamber. Everyone in our community needs to hear other views. And let me add, that’s one reason why it is so important for us to be able to have international students on our campus. There is so much that they contribute to our environment and they enable everyone else to open their minds.
Inskeep: What would you say to someone in the middle of the country who is listening to us and maybe thinking, “I really don’t have a stake in this? I did not go to Harvard. I’m not sending my kid to Harvard. I really don’t like Harvard that much. This looks like it’s about a different kind of people. And Harvard deserves what they’re getting. Or in any case, it doesn’t matter much to me.” How would you deal with a person who has that attitude?
I would ask them to study more about universities like Harvard, which is a research university. The center of the university is teaching and learning. If you look at the activities of the university, a lot of it is about research. There are many discoveries that have come from Harvard and other universities, and many treatments of all kinds of cancer.
Comment on ‘Weak Allocation of Research Funds to Research Universities and Trade Schools for Education and Research’ by J. C. Garber
Garber: I would say that the federal government has the authority through the budgeting process to reallocate funds. What is his problem that he wants to solve by doing that? The money that goes to research universities in the form of grants and contracts, which is almost all of the federal support that we get, is used to pay for work that we perform at the behest of the government. So in reallocating to some other use, including trade schools, it means that work just won’t be performed. Is it the most effective use of federal funding? Do you really want to cut back on research dollars? I’m not concerned about whether it goes to college or a trade school, just as long as it goes to work on highways. How much value does the federal government get from its research expenditures? There is a lot of actual research demonstrating the returns to the American people have been enormous.
In an interview with Steve Inskept on Monday, Garber said “we need to be firm in our commitments to what we stand for.” “And what we stand for – I believe I speak for other universities – is education, pursuit of the truth, helping to educate people for better futures.”
The letter from the U.S. General Services Administration is dated Tuesday and it states that agencies have to submit a list of their terminated contracts by June 6.
“We want to encourage your agency to look at other vendors for future services where you had previously considered Harvard” said the letter signed by the Commissioner of the GSA’s Federal Acquisition Service.
A government official who was not authorized to speak spoke to the New York Times and confirmed the authenticity of the letter.
