Conservatives have long had a beef with higher education. William Buckley first warned that the universities were rife with Marxists and leftists in his book “God and Man at Yale.” Since then, it has been open warfare on universities, which are the generators of ideas and discoveries in science, technology, history, literature, and other frontiers of knowledge.

The battle is briefly described in this article in The Atlantic by Jason Blakeley, who sees the battle as part of the long history of anti-intellectualism and preference for the practical over the theoretical.

What is undeniable, wherever you start the story, is that the Republican tax bills target universities and their students.

Instead of increasing access to higher education, which benefits students and society, the Republican tax plans will narrow access and narrow opportunity. The unprecedented tax on university endowments will reduce funds available for scholarships to the nation’s top universities and colleges.

He writes:

The Republican-controlled Congress is now poised to pass one of the most dramatic changes to the tax code in more than a generation—one with significant benefits for the wealthiest sector of society. Yet an aspect of this legislation receiving little attention is how it marks the culmination of a decades-long renouncement of higher education by portions of the American conservative movement.

For one, the legislation would for the first time ever require universities to pay taxes on their endowment income. Universities have traditionally received tax exemptions on those assets in part because they are viewed as contributing to the public good. In addition, the House bill includes provisions to end graduate-student tax breaks, leading professors and graduate students at top universities to worry that studying for a Ph.D. will become unaffordable for all but the wealthy. (The Senate bill doesn’t include the latter provision; the two pieces of legislation head to conference committee shortly.) With tax analysts identifying corporations as the Republican plan’s biggest winners, a politics of factionalism seems implicit in the bill: Private corporations deserve even greater assets, while America’s universities merit higher levels of taxation.

Land-grant universities were established as “the people’s universities,” to make higher education affordable and accessible in every state. But state legislatures have been cutting their budgets, shifting the cost from the state to students.

POLITICO posted an interview with a leader of this sector who says they have lost their way.

http://go.politicoemail.com/?qs=1bad34eb551bafa437b0b32b8476fc18108fba152bd1b68f868aded88ac306a79cfc8879fa7f05bdbe813161ee947288

HAVE LAND-GRANT UNIVERSITIES LOST THEIR WAY? That’s what West Virginia University President E. Gordon Gee argues. Land-grant universities, created by Congress in the 1800s, were meant to be “the people’s universities,” Gee told Morning Education, “not necessarily to do basic research or discover the cure for cancer, but to make sure the people in their state and region were served very well and had access to American opportunity. Over time, I think that has been lost.”

– Gee, who has spent 25 years leading land-grant universities, sees a crisis: Legislatures have slashed support for universities, while Americans are increasingly losing faith in higher education.

– “Universities have a clear and present danger and they don’t realize it,” Gee said. “I believe we are living on fumes.” Gee said he thinks a “fundamental restructuring” is needed in higher education – largely on the parts of universities themselves. They are too homogenized, all chasing the same version of prestige pushed by a rankings-fueled culture that often benefits the wealthy, he said.

– Land-grant universities need to remember their purpose, Gee said. “The major research universities, the Browns and Vanderbilts, need to to do their thing. Their role is not to be a land-grant institution. My role is not to be Vanderbilt or Brown.”

– Turns out a lot of land-grant presidents might agree. Gee is working on a book with Ohio State University Professor Stephen Gavazzi, for which the two interviewed 27 land-grant leaders (anonymously, which they said was like giving the presidents and chancellors a “truth serum”). The leaders described an “existential higher education crisis” in America, Gee said. Many took responsibility and said they struggle to understand how to change the narrative. The two presented early findings at the Association of Public & Land-grant Universities conference in D.C. on Monday. They plan to release the book next fall. They spoke to Morning Education before the panel.

– So what should land-grant universities be doing? “Our plea is one of purpose,” Gee said. Stop chasing rankings and try to solve immediate problems in their communities, such as the opioid crisis. “The land-grant universities need to be attacking that directly and creating reasons for people to come out of that crisis,” Gee said. They should also find ways to make it easier for people to attend. “You have to create opportunities for people to have access,” Gee said.“