A few weeks ago, New York Times columnist David Brooks penned an editorial in which he talked about academe's not-so-subtle bias against center-right or conservative viewpoints [see http://www.edexcellence.net/gadfly/issue.cfm?issue=117#1474]. This week, in a similar vein, National Review Online's Stanley Kurtz urges Congress to pass H.R. 3077--the International Studies in Higher Education Act. This bill would reform Title VI by setting up an advisory board to oversee the distribution of grants to "area studies" programs in institutions of higher education. Under Title VI, federal subsidies are given to universities for programs that specialize in specific regions--including the Middle East--because they "contribute to national security" by creating experts who can staff embassies and State Department regional desks. Kurtz and other critics claim that many of these programs are overtly hostile to American foreign policy and deliberately shut out opposing (i.e. pro-American) viewpoints. While universities have the right to create departments with any viewpoint they wish, Kurtz questions whether the federal government should be in the business of supporting academic anti-Americanism. To ensure that government-subsidized university departments have faculty that represent a variety of viewpoints, H.R. 3077 would create an "advisory panel" to oversee grant distribution to universities and deny federal subsidies for programs that are blatantly unbalanced.
"Reforming the campus," by Stanley Kurtz, National Review Online, October 14, 2003
"Foreign-studies classes could face more scrutiny," by Sean Cavanagh, Education Week, October 15, 2003