The Trump administration wants to eliminate remaining federal funds
Harvard University: Why do we need the federal government to cut off research funding? Dr. Alan Garber’s letter to the U.S. Secretary of Education
Harvard University’s leader says institutions need to be firm in their positions and double down on what they stand for as President Donald Trump takes aim at top universities.
In May a federal task force wrote a letter to Harvard stating that they would lose $450 million in grants from eight federal agencies. That came in response to a letter the Harvard president, Alan Garber, sent to Linda McMahon, the U.S. secretary of education, denying the administration’s allegations that the school was partisan. He made it clear that the school was not an arm of any political party.
“Why cut off research funding? “Sure, it hurts Harvard, but it hurts the country because the research funding is not a gift, and that is what high-priority work is.”
His university’s work is an example of how its work helps the U.S. public.
In an April statement the Joint Task Force to combat antisemitism said Harvard’s failure to comply reinforces the troubling entitlement mindset that is endemic in our nation’s most prestigious universities and colleges. The disruption of learning that has occurred recently is not acceptable. The harassment of Jewish students is intolerable. It is time for elite universities to take the problem seriously and commit to meaningful change if they wish to continue receiving taxpayer support.”
Garber: Well, clearly, there has been tremendous division on campus over that period of time. 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 those recommendations we had already adopted, some we are currently working through. But I do believe that we have a real problem in this regard, or we had a real problem. We have taken a lot of steps to address it.
Is this what you mean? when, in the lawsuit, you say that without international students, which is a quarter of your student body, Harvard would not be Harvard?
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. We’ve done everything we possibly can to comply with the law.
The school made substantial and real progress over the past year despite the allegations that it had failed to protect Jewish students.
What would you say to someone who has a stake in the study of Harvard and other universities? An example of what Harvard does and doesn’t do
Is this a small example of what you’re trying to do in a large way? You want people to engage each other in a civil way, but you want to allow all sorts of ideas.
It’s absolutely true. We want people to be talking about difficult topics when they disagree. We should be out of the echo chamber. Everyone in our community should hear other opinions. One of the reasons why it’s important for us to offer international students on our campus is because of that. They help open people’s minds, as much as they contribute to our environment.
Would you tell someone in the middle of the country that he really doesn’t have a stake in this? I did not go to Harvard. My kid won’t be going to Harvard. I don’t like Harvard very much. It appears to be about different kinds of people. And Harvard deserves what they’re getting. In any case, it doesn’t matter to me. What would you say to somebody who has that attitude?
I would like them to learn more about Harvard, and about universities that are research universities. At the center of our university is teaching and learning. Research is the main focus of the university’s activities. There are a lot of discoveries made by Harvard and other universities about cancer and treatments of the disease.
Why do some universities go to trade schools? An expert’s assessment of the U.S. Government’s research funding spendthrift on research
The budgeting process is used by the federal government to reallocate funds. But the question to ask is what problem is he trying to solve by doing that? Most of the federal support we get for research universities is spent on grants and contracts that are used to help pay for the work we do for the government. It means that work won’t be performed in reallocating to trade schools. This is the right question, Is this the best use of federal funding? Do you really want to cut back on research dollars? I’m not worried about whether it goes to a trade school or works on highways. The federal government’s expenditures on research is a real question. The returns to the American people have been enormous.
“We need to be clear about what we stand for in order to keep our promises,” she said in the interview. “Education, pursuit of the truth, helping to educate people for better futures is what we stand for.”
A letter from the U.S. General Services Administration gives agencies six weeks to list any contracts they have stopped working with the university.
“Going forward, we also encourage your agency to seek alternative vendors for future services where you had previously considered Harvard,” reads the letter, signed by Josh Gruenbaum, the commissioner of the GSA’s Federal Acquisition Service.
The government official, who did not want to be named because they were not authorized to speak, confirmed the authenticity of the letter, first published by the New York Times.