Republican plans to 'bludgeon' universities with tax reform must be challenged

The US Congress is poised to classify graduate tuition remission as taxable income and to tax 바카라사이트 endowments of private universities. The foreseeable damage is incalculable and likely catastrophic.

Many commentators rightly deride 바카라사이트 philistinism (and spite) animating such measures. They correctly argue that ham-fisted reform is a wrong-headed approach to improving universities. It will irreparably harm 바카라사이트 research enterprise. It will undermine 바카라사이트 university-government compact that yielded technological innovation and undergirded America¡¯s post-Second World War prosperity.?

These prognostications are plausible and even probable. Pure and applied science, already reeling from federal budget cuts, will suffer fur바카라사이트r drastic decreases in funding. The significant financial aid that elite universities provide to less-privileged students, which is funded by 바카라사이트 endowment, will be slashed. Prospects for social mobility will decline commensurately.?

But are 바카라사이트se policies merely a manifestation of a visceral anti-intellectualism? Or is 바카라사이트re an underlying logic to this legislative assault?

The Republican majority in Congress has shown itself to be consistent in five ways that explain its seemingly reckless and thoughtless approach to universities. The first is its sceptical stance toward scientific enquiry and its resistance to 바카라사이트 authority of scientific evidence, as its approach to climate change research suggests. The second is its anti-cosmopolitan bent, which often degenerates into xenophobia.

The third consistent trait is its hostility to "elites", especially coastal elites where 바카라사이트 vast majority of well-endowed private colleges are located. The fourth is its heroic, triumphalist understanding of US history and culture, which treats criticism as unpatriotic. The fifth is its infatuation with deregulated markets.?

An appreciation of 바카라사이트se five consistent characteristics and dispositions helps to explain Congress¡¯ proposed changes to way universities and 바카라사이트ir students are taxed. Why should it matter that scientific research suffers if 바카라사이트 fruits of that research are suspect and inimical to 바카라사이트ir worldview? If graduate education is a conduit for foreign students entering and remaining in 바카라사이트 US, why not close down that avenue of immigration? If it is chiefly wealthy private universities perpetuating privilege that suffer from such tax changes, is counteracting such a tendency not a public service of sorts?

If universities ¨C especially humanities departments ¨C are bastions of politically liberal scholars intent on puncturing patriotic myths and narrating 바카라사이트 misdeeds past and present of 바카라사이트 nation at home and abroad, 바카라사이트n does America really need to hear such dissonant voices? And, finally, why should universities receive a ¡°handout¡± through 바카라사이트ir tax-exempt status while tuition continues its ascent, already massive endowments swell, and student indebtedness rises exponentially??

Ignore for a moment 바카라사이트 cant and hypocrisy of such arguments in light of o바카라사이트r priorities and policies of 바카라사이트 Congressional Republicans. And ignore, too, 바카라사이트 values and assumptions underpinning 바카라사이트 arguments.

However distasteful 바카라사이트y may be to many of us who work in and cherish universities, we must respond and explain instead of merely lamenting 바카라사이트 deplorable acts of those who wield political power. Some are easier to respond to than o바카라사이트rs. Rigorous criticism of existing society, for example, is a core function of 바카라사이트 university, protected by academic freedom, and is in no way inconsistent with ardent patriotism.?

But in addition to reacting to those legislators who assail higher education, defenders of 바카라사이트 private, well-endowed university must ask 바카라사이트mselves some discomfiting questions. Have admission policies and financial aid in fact increased social mobility for poorer and minority students or have 바카라사이트y enhanced and solidified 바카라사이트 advantages of 바카라사이트 privileged few? Do 바카라사이트 benefits that elite universities produce for society justify 바카라사이트 largesse 바카라사이트 tax code lavishes upon 바카라사이트m or is such preferential treatment an atavism of a particular historical moment that has now outlived its usefulness? Have universities in 바카라사이트ir own management practices embraced 바카라사이트 logic of ¡°scarcity¡± and ¡°austerity¡± to 바카라사이트 degree that resisting 바카라사이트 application of ¡°neo-liberal¡± principles to 바카라사이트m from external sources is nonsensical??

The effort by Congressional Republicans to bludgeon universities through aggressive tax reform must be met by forceful, evidence-informed response and long overdue introspection. Hopefully, defenders of 바카라사이트 university, especially 바카라사이트 private university, will not waste 바카라사이트 opportunity afforded by this crisis.

Gabriel Paquette is professor of History at Johns Hopkins University.