Higher education leaders ask lawmakers for state funding as federal cuts loom
Jay O. Rothman, president of the University of Wisconsin System, speaks during the UW Board of Regents meeting hosted at Union South at the University of Wisconsin–Madison on Feb. 9, 2023. (Photo by Althea Dotzour / UW–Madison)
Federal funding cuts and national culture war politics cast a long shadow over a state legislative committee hearing Thursday as Wisconsin's higher education leaders asked lawmakers for additional investments in the next state budget — warning that disinvestment by the state could damage public universities', private nonprofit schools' and technical colleges' ability to serve students and the state.
Lawmakers working on the 2025-27 state budget are gathering feedback from agency heads and members of the public just as higher education institutions across the country are facing an onslaught of threats from the Trump administration.
As Republican lawmakers on the Assembly Colleges and Universities Committee grilled Universities of Wisconsin President Jay Rothman and other higher education leaders on their budget goals, they appeared skeptical about providing additional funding. They pointed to current levels of spending and diversity, equity and inclusion programs, which state Republicans have demanded be cut from the UW. Democratic lawmakers, meanwhile, expressed concerns about federal cuts to research and recent targeting of international students whose visas have been revoked.
Rothman asked lawmakers whether the state is going to let its public universities 'atrophy.' If not, he said, new investments need to be made. The UW system has requested an additional $855 million, with the support of Gov. Tony Evers, in the upcoming budget.
The money would be used to keep college affordable and accessible for Wisconsinites, invest in retaining talented staff and support innovation, Rothman said. He told lawmakers the money would help UW maintain its two-year campuses and avoid raising tuition.
'We are at a state that without additional support from the state, student successes that we are seeing across our universities are at risk,' Rothman said. He noted that the state's investment in the system has not kept up with inflation, and the money would put Wisconsin at the median nationwide. This would be up from Wisconsin's current position of 43rd out of 50 when it comes to state investment in public universities.
This is not the first time Rothman has testified to lawmakers about the system's request, having addressed lawmakers on the Joint Finance Committee, which is in charge of writing the budget on April 1.
Committee Chair Rep. Dave Murphy (R-Greenville) asked Rothman where he thought the money would come from.
'That is a challenge for the Legislature… This is an investment in the future of the state. We are returning $23 for every dollar that is invested in the Universities of Wisconsin,' Rothman said, citing a number that comes from a 2018 study.
Murphy told Rothman that he was 'leery' of that number.
'If we're increasing the money to the university by $855 million, are you telling me that I can expect $20 billion?' Murphy asked.
Rothman pointed out that lawmakers and their constituents have benefited from the existence of UW schools.
'At this table, you represent districts that have 9,000 students currently in school at the Universities of Wisconsin… More than half of you have attended one of our universities and hopefully you have benefitted from that,' Rothman said.
Murphy attended UW-Fox Valley from 1972 to 1974, according to his legislative biography. The school was merged with UW-Fond du Lac and UW-Oshkosh in 2018, and is now known as UW Oshkosh-Fox Cities. That campus is set to close in June.
Trump administration threats hanging over college campuses across the nation were central to the discussion over whether lawmakers should provide universities additional state funding.
Rep. Amanda Nedweski (R-Pleasant Prairie) brought up diversity, equity and inclusion efforts at UW institutions. An audit released last week found campuses haven't been tracking their spending on these efforts. The audit was part of Republican lawmakers' ongoing targeting of DEI, and comes as the Trump administration has also ramped up efforts to try to eliminate diversity programs in education.
Republican lawmakers used staff pay and capital projects funding during the last legislative cycle as a negotiating tool with the UW system to get concessions on DEI efforts, including a reduction in positions focused on DEI.
'We're trying to see more of an effort to see in money savings, and I know there's been reductions in positions, but there's also been requests to add more,' Nedweski said. 'We had a deal on DEI. Would you say that the UW system kept up their end of the deal?'
'Yes,' Rothman said.
'I wouldn't say that's what the audit says,' Nedweski said.
Rothman responded that the UW has gone above and beyond the terms of the deal, having reduced staffing by 43 positions even though the agreed upon deadline won't arrive until December 2026.
'We were on our way when the [Legislative Audit Bureau] did its field work in May of 2024,' Rothman said. 'Since that time, we have made significant progress, and we are in compliance with the agreement as it relates to the positions. We've exceeded what we said we were going to do.'
Nedweski said she was concerned about being able to measure the outcomes of the investments in DEI programs.
'We now have a pattern within the UW system and our other state agencies where taxpayers are making investments in things like employees teleworking without knowing if there's productivity. We've heard repeatedly from the UW system that we don't really know their actual impact,' Nedweski said.
Rothman noted that nearly 36,000 students graduate with degrees from Universities of Wisconsin schools each year.
'I think that is an extraordinary [return-on-investment] for our state,' Rothman said.
Murphy asked Rothman about a letter from the Trump administration sent to over 60 schools, including UW-Madison, warning that they could face consequences if they don't address 'antisemitism' on campus. UW-Madison is one of many schools where students joined encampment protests against the war in Gaza last spring. The Trump administration has said the university didn't properly protect Jewish students.
'How do we control this antisemitism problem on our campuses?' Murphy asked.
Before Rothman answered the question, Rep. Jodi Emerson (D-Eau Claire) interjected, asking what the topic had to do with the budget.
Murphy shot back that, as chair of the committee, he could ask what he wanted.
'If you think this isn't a budgetary issue, I think you should talk to Columbia University and see what they would say about that,' Murphy said. Columbia became a target of the Trump administration after large student protests there and has had over $400 million in federal funding, mostly for medical and other scientific research, terminated, despite agreeing to police student protesters and place the department of Middle East, South Asian and African Studies under scrutiny.
Rothman said the UW system is navigating First Amendment issues and being inclusive, but that the UW has done a lot of work to ensure that all students, including Jewish students, those with conservative beliefs, veterans, those who are disabled, 'feel they are part of the campus community.'
Democrats on the committee expressed concerns about federal cuts to research funding, potential threats to Pell Grants and student loans and the targeting of international students.
Emerson asked about the impact of federal cuts to research. The Trump administration has been targeting funding for higher education institutions across the country, including cutting over $12 million in research funding to UW-Madison. The flagship campus has laid off six employees so far.
Rothman said he is deeply concerned about the federal cuts. UW-Madison and UW-Milwaukee are both tier one research institutions and the federal government invests about $1 billion annually in UW schools for research, Rothman said.
'It's not like we can start five years from now, six years from now… These research engines were built over generations,' Rothman said. 'If they are not maintained, that's gone.'
Rothman said the impact would be felt in sectors across the state including as research would be lost and researchers even in the private sector could be affected as many are educated at public universities.
Rothman said that philanthropic support would be incapable of filling the gap that would be left from federal funding cuts.
Nedweski said she thought there is skepticism among taxpayers about the federal funding of research. She asked whether the UW system is expecting Wisconsin taxpayers to pick up the cost.
'I don't think that the state could afford to pick up what could be lost,' Rothman said. 'I think what's going to happen if that occurs is that research capacity is going to decline, research infrastructure is going to decline and that will be our new reality going forward.'
Emerson also asked Rothman whether the Trump administration's move to cancel foreign students' visas is having a 'chilling effect' on prospective international students. Dozens of UW students and alumni, including 26 at UW-Madison, have had their visas cancelled by the Trump administration in recent weeks as a part of an unprecedented nationwide move by the federal government targeting international students.
'Do we have fewer applications from international students for next school year?… Are there international students who are thinking of finishing their bachelor's or higher education back home?' Emerson asked.
Rothman said that it was too early to know as most applications have already been submitted. He said that about 10,000 international students attend UW schools.
'We may have a number of international students who might be accepted into our universities that will not come because of this. We know there is anxiety among our international students just generally, for reasons that are understandable,' Rothman said, adding that the university is seeking to support students, but is not providing legal representation to them.
Wisconsin Association of Independent Colleges and Universities President Eric Fulcomer told lawmakers the top priority for private nonprofit colleges and universities is doubling the funding for the Wisconsin Grant (WG-PNP) Program, which provides assistance to undergraduate, Wisconsin residents enrolled in a degree or certificate program at non-profit, independent colleges or universities based in Wisconsin, from $57 million to $114 million.
Fulcomer's organization represents 22 private nonprofit colleges and universities in Wisconsin, including Marquette University, the Medical College of Wisconsin, Beloit College and St. Norbert College. It also includes Northland College, which was founded in 1892, but announced in February the school will be closing after this year's graduation due to financial hardships.
There has been no additional investment in the grant program in the last two state budgets. Private, nonprofit schools don't receive state funding to sustain their operations, but many students rely on the funding to be able to attend the schools.
Among its neighboring states, Wisconsin ranks last when it comes to the amount of need-based grants awarded to students attending private nonprofit schools. The investment would not bring Wisconsin to the top, but would bring it to the middle among states in the Midwest. Currently, Wisconsin can give a maximum amount of $4,400.
The schools' request is more than the governor's budget request; Evers proposed a 20% increase.
'I would prefer a larger increase,' Fulcomer said. '20% would be welcomed but it's not enough to move the needle.'
If there is no increase in the budget, Fulcomer said the award will need to be reduced to $3,850, bringing Wisconsin even further below its peers.
Nedweski asked if he had suggestions for where the money for the budget request could come from. The state has a $4 billion budget surplus, which Evers wants to pull from to fund many priorities in his budget.
Fulcomer noted that about a quarter of all bachelor's degrees and a third of all master's degrees come from Wisconsin's private, nonprofit schools and that students are providing millions in revenue to the state via taxes.
'It's a good investment, but I'm not in a position to tell you where you might find those dollars,' Fulcomer said.
'We are not operating with a lot of extra money in the next biennium. If you get more, it has to come out of somebody else's bucket,' Nedweski said.
Rep. Rob Kreibich (R-New Richmond) commented that he thinks lawmakers 'should reward success' and he admires the retention and placement rates for the private schools.
Emerson asked about what would happen if the Pell Grants were reduced or eliminated — a question that comes as the federal grants face a shortfall and as there is also uncertainty surrounding the future of student loans.
'Potentially we'd be looking at a 27% cut to enrollment,' Fulcomer said. 'Cutting the Pell Grant or eliminating the Pell Grant would be devastating for our sector.'
Wisconsin Technical College System President Layla Merrifield asked for about $60 million from the state, including $45 million that would go toward general aid for its 16 colleges. The technical college system's budget for 2024-25 totaled about $1.3 billion with $592.9 million coming from state aid.
'There's almost no better investment that you could make in Wisconsin's economy, in its workforce and its people than the technical college system,' Merrifield said. 'Our outcomes are well documented. We are transparent with our data, both our failings and our successes.'
Murphy thanked Merrifield for her approach to the budget.
It is 'a little bit what we were looking for from the UW today…,' Murphy said. 'They want $855 million, but it's taken nine months, and we still don't have very much detail around what they expect to do with that money.'
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
13 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump aides want Texas to redraw its congressional maps to boost the GOP. What would that mean?
This coverage is made possible through Votebeat, a nonpartisan news organization covering local election administration and voting access. Sign up for Votebeat Texas' free newsletters here. Republicans representing Texas in Congress are considering this week whether to push their state Legislature to take the unusual step of redrawing district lines to shore up the GOP's advantage in the U.S. House. But the contours of the plan, including whether Gov. Greg Abbott would call a special session of the Legislature to redraw the maps, remain largely uncertain. The idea is being driven by President Donald Trump's political advisers, who want to draw up new maps that would give Republicans a better chance to flip seats currently held by Democrats, according to two GOP congressional aides familiar with the matter. That proposal, which would involve shifting GOP voters from safely red districts into neighboring blue ones, is aimed at safeguarding Republicans' thin majority in Congress, where they control the lower chamber, 220-212. The redistricting proposal, and the Trump team's role in pushing it, was first reported by The New York Times Monday. Without a Republican majority in Congress, Trump's legislative agenda would likely stall, and the president could face investigations from newly empowered Democratic committee chairs intent on scrutinizing the White House. Here's what we know about the plan so far: On Capitol Hill, members of the Texas GOP delegation huddled Monday night to discuss the prospect of reshaping their districts. Most of the 25-member group expressed reluctance about the idea, citing concerns about jeopardizing their districts in next year's midterms if the new maps overextended the GOP's advantage, according to the two GOP aides, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss the private deliberations. Rep. Jodey Arrington, R-Lubbock, was skeptical of the idea. 'We just recently worked on the new maps,' Arrington told The Texas Tribune. To reopen the process, he said, 'there'd have to be a significant benefit to our state.' The delegation has yet to be presented with mockups of new maps, two aides said. Each state's political maps must be redrawn once a decade, after each round of the U.S. census, to account for population growth and ensure every congressional and legislative district has roughly the same number of people. Texas lawmakers last overhauled their district lines in 2021. There's no federal law that prohibits states from redrawing district maps midcycle, said Justin Levitt, an election law professor at Loyola Marymount University and a former deputy assistant attorney general in the Department of Justice's civil rights division. Laws around the timing to redraw congressional and state district maps vary by state. In Texas, the state constitution doesn't specify timing, so the redrawing of maps is left to the discretion of the governor and the Legislature. Lawmakers gaveled out of their 140-day regular session last week, meaning they would need to be called back for a special session to change the state's political maps. Abbott has the sole authority to order overtime sessions and decide what lawmakers are allowed to consider. A trial is underway in El Paso in a long-running challenge to the state legislative and congressional district maps Texas drew after the 2020 U.S. Census. If Texas redraws its congressional maps, state officials would then ask the court to toss the claims challenging those districts 'that no longer exist,' Levitt said. The portion of the case over the state legislative district maps would continue. If the judge agrees, then both parties would have to file new legal claims for the updated maps. It isn't clear how much maps could change, but voters could find themselves in new districts, and Levitt said redrawing the lines in the middle of the redistricting cycle is a bad idea. 'If the people of Texas think that their representatives have done a bad job, then when the [district] lines change, they're not voting on those representatives anymore,' Levitt said. 'New people are voting on those representatives.' The National Democratic Redistricting Committee, Democrats' national arm for contesting state GOP mapmaking, said the proposal to expand Republicans' stronghold in Texas was 'yet another example of Trump trying to suppress votes in order to hold onto power.' 'Texas's congressional map is already being sued for violating the Voting Rights Act because it diminishes the voting power of the state's fast-growing Latino population,' John Bisognano, president of the NDRC said. 'To draw an even more extreme gerrymander would only assure that the barrage of legal challenges against Texas will continue.' When Republicans in charge of the Legislature redrew the district lines after the 2020 census, they focused on reinforcing their political support in districts already controlled by the GOP. This redistricting proposal would likely take a different approach. As things stand, Republicans hold 25 of the state's 38 congressional seats. Democrats hold 12 seats and are expected to regain control of Texas' one vacant seat in a special election this fall. Most of Texas' GOP-controlled districts lean heavily Republican: In last year's election, 24 of those 25 seats were carried by a Republican victor who received at least 60% of the vote or ran unopposed. The exception was U.S. Rep. Monica De La Cruz, R-Edinburg, who captured 57% of the vote and won by a comfortable 14-point margin. With little competition to speak of, The Times reported, Trump's political advisers believe at least some of those districts could bear the loss of GOP voters who would be reshuffled into neighboring, Democratic-held districts — giving Republican hopefuls a better chance to flip those seats from blue to red. The party in control of the White House frequently loses seats during midterm cycles, and Trump's team is likely looking to offset potential GOP losses in other states and improve the odds of holding on to a narrow House majority. Incumbent Republicans, though, don't love the idea of sacrificing a comfortable race in a safe district for the possibility of picking up a few seats, according to GOP aides. In 2003, after Texas Republicans initially left it up to the courts to draw new lines following the 2000 census, then-U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, a Sugar Land Republican, embarked instead on a bold course of action to consolidate GOP power in the state. He, along with his Republican allies, redrew the lines as the opening salvo to a multistate redistricting plan aimed at accumulating power for his party in states across the country. Enraged by the power play, Democrats fled the state, depriving the Texas House of the quorum it needed to function. The rebels eventually relented under threat of arrest, a rare power in the Texas Constitution used to compel absent members back to return to Austin when the Legislature is in session. The lines were then redrawn, cementing the GOP majority the delegation has enjoyed in Washington for the past two decades. However, what's at play this time is different than in the early 2000s, when Republicans had a newfound majority in the Legislature and had a number of vulnerable Democratic incumbents they could pick off. Now, Republicans have been entrenched in the majority for decades and will have to answer the question of whether there's really more to gain, said Kareem Crayton, the vice president of the Brennan Center for Justice's Washington office. 'That's the tradeoff. You can do that too much so that you actually make them so competitive that the other side wins,' Crayton said. 'That's always a danger.' Texas Republicans are planning to reconvene Thursday to continue discussing the plan, according to Rep. Beth Van Duyne, R-Irving, and Rep. Wesley Hunt, R-Houston, who said they will attend the meeting. Members of Trump's political team are also expected to attend, according to Hunt and two GOP congressional aides familiar with the matter. Natalia Contreras is a reporter for Votebeat in partnership with the Texas Tribune. She's based in Corpus Christi. Contact Natalia at ncontreras@ Disclosure: New York Times has been a financial supporter of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune's journalism. Find a complete list of them here. Big news: 20 more speakers join the TribFest lineup! New additions include Margaret Spellings, former U.S. secretary of education and CEO of the Bipartisan Policy Center; Michael Curry, former presiding bishop and primate of The Episcopal Church; Beto O'Rourke, former U.S. Representative, D-El Paso; Joe Lonsdale, entrepreneur, founder and managing partner at 8VC; and Katie Phang, journalist and trial lawyer. Get tickets. TribFest 2025 is presented by JPMorganChase.
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Musk regrets some of his Trump criticisms, says they 'went too far'
Musk regrets some of his Trump criticisms, says they 'went too far' Elon Musk, the world's richest person and Donald Trump's former advisor, says he regretted some of his recent criticisms of the US president (Kevin Dietsch) (Kevin Dietsch/GETTY IMAGESvia AFP) Elon Musk, the world's richest person and Donald Trump's former advisor, said Wednesday he regretted some of his recent criticisms of the US president, after the pair's public falling-out last week. "I regret some of my posts about President @realDonaldTrump last week. They went too far," Musk wrote on his social media platform X, in a message that was received favorably by the White House. Musk's expression of regret came just days after Trump threatened the tech billionaire with "serious consequences" if he sought to punish Republicans who vote for a controversial spending bill. Their blistering break-up -- largely carried out on social media before a riveted public since Thursday last week -- was ignited by Musk's harsh criticism of Trump's so-called "big, beautiful" spending bill, which is currently before Congress. ADVERTISEMENT Some lawmakers who were against the bill had called on Musk -- one of the Republican Party's biggest financial backers in last year's presidential election -- to fund primary challenges against Republicans who voted for the legislation. "He'll have to pay very serious consequences if he does that," Trump, who also branded Musk "disrespectful," told NBC News on Saturday, without specifying what those consequences would be. Trump also said he had "no" desire to repair his relationship with the South African-born Tesla and SpaceX chief, and that he has "no intention of speaking to him." But after Musk's expression of regret, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters that Trump was "appreciative," adding that "no efforts" had been made on a threat by Trump to end some of Musk's government contracts. "The president acknowledged the statement that Elon put out this morning, and he is appreciative of it," Leavitt said. ADVERTISEMENT According to the New York Times, Musk's message followed a phone call to Trump late on Monday night. Vice President JD Vance and Chief of Staff Susan Wiles had also been working with Musk on how to broker a truce with Trump, the report said. - 'Wish him well' - In his post on Wednesday, Musk did not specify which of his criticisms of Trump had gone "too far." The former allies had seemed to have cut ties amicably about two weeks ago, with Trump giving Musk a glowing send-off as he left his cost-cutting role at the so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). But their relationship cracked within days, with Musk describing the spending bill as an "abomination" that, if passed by Congress, could define Trump's second term in office. Trump hit back at Musk's comments in an Oval Office diatribe and from there the row detonated, leaving Washington stunned. ADVERTISEMENT Trump later said on his Truth Social platform that cutting billions of dollars in subsidies and contracts to Musk's companies would be the "easiest way" to save the US government money. US media have put the value of the contracts at $18 billion. With real political and economic risks to their falling out, both already appeared to inch back from the brink on Friday, with Trump telling reporters "I just wish him well," and Musk responding on X: "Likewise." Trump had spoken to NBC on Saturday after Musk deleted one of the explosive allegations he had made during their fallout, linking the president with disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein, who was accused of sex trafficking. bur-arp/aha
San Francisco Chronicle
17 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Missouri approves stadium aid for Kansas City Chiefs and Royals and disaster relief for St. Louis
JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. (AP) — Missouri lawmakers on Wednesday approved hundreds of millions of dollars of financial aid to try to persuade the Kansas City Chiefs and Royals to remain in the state and help the St. Louis area recover from a devastating tornado. House passage sends the legislative package to Republican Gov. Mike Kehoe, who called lawmakers into special session with a plea for urgent action. Kehoe is expected to sign the measures into law. Missouri's session paired two otherwise unrelated national trends — a movement for new taxpayer-funded sports stadiums and a reevaluation of states' roles in natural disasters as President Donald Trump's administration reassess federal aid programs. The stadium subsidies already were a top concern in Missouri when a deadly tornado struck St. Louis on May 16, causing an estimated $1.6 billion of damage a day after lawmakers had wrapped up work in their annual regular session. The disaster relief had widespread support. Lawmakers listened attentively on Wednesday as Democratic state Rep. Kimberly-Ann Collins described with a cracking voice how she witnessed the tornado rip the roof off her house and damage her St. Louis neighborhood. Collins said she has no home insurance, slept in her car for days and has accepted food from others. 'Homes are crumbled and leveled,' said Collins, adding: 'It hurts me to my core to see the families that have worked so hard, the businesses that have worked so hard, to see them ripped apart.' Lawmakers approved $100 million of open-ended aid for St. Louis and $25 million for emergency housing assistance in any areas covered under requests for presidential disaster declarations. They also authorized a $5,000 income tax credit to offset insurance policy deductibles for homeowners and renters hit by this year's storms — a provision that state budget director Dan Haug said could eventually cost up to $600 million. The Chiefs and Royals currently play football and baseball in side-by-side stadiums in Jackson County, Missouri, under leases that expire in January 2031. Jackson County voters last year defeated a sales tax extension that would have helped finance an $800 million renovation of the Chiefs' Arrowhead Stadium and a $2 billion ballpark district for the Royals in downtown Kansas City. That prompted lawmakers in neighboring Kansas last year to authorize bonds for up to 70% of the cost of new stadiums in Kansas to lure the teams to their state. The Royals have bought a mortgage for property in Kansas, though the team also has continued to pursue other possible sites in Missouri. The Kansas offer is scheduled to expire June 30, creating urgency for Missouri to approve a counter-offer. Missouri's legislation authorizes bonds covering up to 50% of the cost of new or renovated stadiums, plus up to $50 million of tax credits for each stadium and unspecified aid from local governments. If they choose to stay in Missouri, the Chiefs plan a $1.15 billion renovation of Arrowhead Stadium. Though they have no specific plans in the works, the St. Louis Cardinals also would be eligible for stadium aid if they undertake a project of at least $500 million. Many economists contend public funding for stadiums isn't worth it, because sports tend to divert discretionary spending away from other forms of entertainment rather than generate new income. But supporters said Missouri stands to lose millions of dollars of tax revenue if Kansas City's most prominent professional sports teams move to Kansas. They said Missouri's reputation also would take a hit, particularly if it loses the Chiefs, which have won three of the past six Super Bowls. 'We have the chance to maybe save what is the symbol of this state,' Rep. Jim Murphy, a Republican from St. Louis County, said while illustrating cross-state support for the measure. The legislation faced some bipartisan pushback from those who described it as a subsidy for wealthy sports team owners. Others raised concerns that a property tax break for homeowners, which was added in the Senate to gain votes, violates the state constitution by providing different levels of tax relief in various counties while excluding others entirely.
