by Tim Carpenter, Kansas Reflector
February 29, 2024
TOPEKA — The Kansas House budget committee agreed Thursday the Kansas Board of Regents should analyze whether a need-based state scholarship offered to academically inclined Latino, Black, Native American, Alaskan Native, Asian or Pacific Islander students complied with the U.S. Supreme Court’s latest decisions in college admissions cases.
Rep. Steven Howe, a Salina Republican and chair of the House Higher Education Budget Committee, said the mandate for the report was among appropriations recommendations for the Kansas Board of Regents. The scholarship in question was available to students at public and private colleges and provided $1,850 per year in financial aid.
He said the proposed report ought to measure compliance with decisions of the Supreme Court on affirmative action in college admissions. That would include a 2023 opinion invalidating decades of court precedent by declaring race could no longer be a factor in development of a diverse student body.
“That is just to report back whether there needs to be changes to that scholarship program or not from a legislative perspective,” Howe said. “It is merit-based, but it is also based off of how you would identify your ethnic status.”
Rep. Barbara Ballard, a Lawrence Democrat who is Black, said the provision accepted by the House Appropriations Committee regarding examination of the ethnic minority scholarship could be another troubling attack on efforts by colleges to advance diversity, equity and inclusion on campus. She has expressed concern the DEI movement was orchestrated by conservatives to suppress teaching of U.S. history on racism.
“That’s a red flag to me. I’ll be very honest about it,” Ballard said. “To me, they’re not harmful words.”
$35.7 million bucks
The House committee’s budget blueprint for the Board of Regents didn’t include a proviso crafted by the Senate Ways and Means Committee to delete $35.7 million earmarked for University of Kansas, Kansas State University, Wichita State University and the three state universities at Hays, Emporia and Pittsburg.
That 5% budget reduction would be imposed if the chief executive officer of a state university didn’t certify DEI was no longer a factor in hiring, admissions, tenure reviews, promotions, research proposals and training initiatives. Such a pledge could be complicated by regulations attached to acceptance by universities of federally funded research.
“Absent any meaningful action by the Board of Regents to address concerns of the Legislature, I can certainly see why the Senate decided to offer that provision,” Howe said.
Howe said he was more familiar with House Bill 2460, which he sponsored to prohibit colleges and universities in Kansas from linking admission and employment decisions to requirements that a person adhere to DEI concepts. His bill would mandate each public university make available on a website information on the training of students, faculty and staff on nondiscrimination, race, ethnicity, sex, bias and DEI. Violations of the statute could result in an administrative penalty of $100,000 and would authorize filing of lawsuits to prohibit repeat offenses or to seek financial damages.
Democratic Gov. Laura Kelly vetoed a related budget provision in 2023 that would have forbidden state universities from engaging in DEI activities.
In February, Board of Regents chairman Jon Rolph said legislation undermining diversity in higher education would have an impact on the ability of campuses to meet the needs of individual students and employees. It would undermine the goal of cultivating a “learning environment that supports inclusion and belonging,” he said.
DEI audit, impact
The Legislature’s auditing division recently released a report indicating the six state universities directed by the Board of Regents spent $9 million in tax dollars on DEI-related staffing, training and other services in the 2022-2023 academic year. In all, the six universities devoted $45 million to DEI, but bulk of that money came from private sources.
Nearly all the $9 million logged by auditors was allocated to faculty and staff salary and benefits. Other DEI expenditures were related to outreach programs, computer software, tutoring services and support groups.
On Thursday, the Perryman Group of Waco, Texas, released an assessment of the potential economic implication of anti-DEI legislation in Kansas and Missouri. The report said policies viewed as discriminatory, regardless of the actual intent, could lead to economic harm for a state.
A portion of losses related to criticism of DEI could be tied to travel and tourism. Opposition to DEI activities could undermine a state’s attempt to land new businesses or encourage business expansions, said Ray Perryman, CEO of Perryman Group.
The report commissioned by the Health Forward Foundation said legislation pending in Kansas could risk $898 million in annual gross product and 8,400 jobs through 2030. In Missouri, legislation under consideration could cost the state $2.6 billion in economic activity and 23,800 jobs.
“Health Forward is committed to building inclusive, powerful and healthy communities by focusing on racial equity and economic opportunity. We can’t get there without intentional work focused on diversity, equity, and inclusion,” said McClain Bryant Macklin of Health Forward.
Kansas Reflector is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Kansas Reflector maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Sherman Smith for questions: info@kansasreflector.com. Follow Kansas Reflector on Facebook and Twitter.
