Indiana budget bill curbs university faculty power, ties tenure to new ‘productivity' reviews
The final draft of Indiana's budget bill included last-minute changes to university tenure requirements and faculty's authority over school policy decisions. (Getty Images)
Sweeping changes to how the state's public universities manage faculty tenure and campus governance were quietly folded into Indiana's 2025 budget bill during the final hours of the legislative session despite limited lawmaker debate — and without opportunities for public input.
That's in addition to other unorthodox provisions slipped into the state's next two-year spending plan, like language to give Gov. Mike Braun total say over who sits on Indiana University's Board of Trustees.
Braun has until May 6 to take action on the budget. If he does nothing, the plan automatically becomes law and takes effect July 1.
The new postsecondary rules require faculty at public colleges and universities to post their syllabi online and mandate 'productivity' reviews for tenured professors.
Authority of faculty-led governing bodies was reduced, as well.
There's been ongoing discussion about the efficiency in higher education, and that's always a fair discussion as to how we maximize the use of taxpayer dollars.
– Rep. Jeff Thompson, R-Lizton
Faculty senates, for example, which are traditionally responsible for shaping a school's academic policy, will now be limited to an advisory role. More authority will instead shift to university trustees and administrative leadership.
Republican supermajority leadership maintained the changes are necessary and defended using the budget as a vehicle bill.
House budget architect Rep. Jeff Thompson, R-Lizton, said the language was added because universities, like the rest of state government, need to slim spending.
The two-year budget cuts funding for the state's public colleges by 5%.
'There's been ongoing discussion about the efficiency in higher education, and that's always a fair discussion as to how we maximize the use of taxpayer dollars,' Thompson said. 'That's an ongoing discussion. That's one of our responsibilities.'
But Democrat Rep. Matt Pierce said the move was rushed and unvetted.
'We didn't think we needed to hear from the public, or maybe even, heaven forbid, some faculty members or people who run universities, to kind of understand how they think this provision might work or not work. Would that not have been helpful?' Pierce, of Bloomington, asked Thompson on the House floor shortly before the session concluded.
Thompson reiterated that university governance 'is a fiscal issue,' and that 'sometimes, we make these decisions based on the information we have in front of us.'
Pierce and other Democrats disagreed, noting that the higher education provisions were not previously approved by either the House or Senate chambers, nor were they introduced or debated in other bills or amendments earlier in the session.
Faculty advocates further warned that the changes could threaten academic freedom and deter top scholars from staying in or coming to Indiana.
'The public is left to wonder, who put the supermajority on this track? Who is behind the scenes that has the influence to change decades, if not centuries, of the operation of universities?' Pierce questioned.
'All this crazy stuff … undermining faculty governance, treating them like they're children, and every five years they've got to prove they're doing their job,' he continued. 'Those faculty — the best faculty, the researchers, the people who are searching for cures for cancer, the people learning about and understanding nanotechnology, the people who are going to solve the challenges of our day with science and investigation and inquiry — they're out of here. They're not going to put up with this.'
Once the budget bill becomes law, all tenured professors at Indiana's public colleges and universities must undergo formal 'productivity reviews' at least once every five years.
Bill language specifies that evaluations should 'measure' a professor's 'productivity,' which includes:
the faculty member's teaching workload;
the total number of graduate and undergraduate students taught by the faculty member;
the time spent on instructional assignments and overseeing graduate students; and
the research and creative scholarship productivity of the faculty member.
Institutions will be required to place faculty on probation if they do not meet the standards set through the review process. According to the legislation, that probation 'may result in dismissal.'
CONTACT US
The new review system is reminiscent of a law approved by the General Assembly and former Gov. Eric Holcomb in 2024 that seeks to promote 'intellectual diversity' on Indiana campuses.
Boards of trustees decide what qualifies as 'intellectual diversity,' although the term has been championed by Republican lawmakers who contend that conservative students and faculty members are increasingly ostracized at progressively liberal college and university settings — or at least perceive such shunning.
Under the law adopted last year, both nontenured and tenured faculty are judged on whether — and to what extent — they've delivered intellectually 'diverse' instruction. University trustees are allowed to decide punishments for professors who fail to meet their school's standards.
Boards are required to deny promotions and tenure to faculty members if, 'based on past performance or other determination by the board,' they are 'unlikely to foster … intellectual diversity.' Additionally, 'intellectual diversity' must be considered in post-tenure reviews, which are now required at least every five years.
Colleges' governance groups, like faculty senates and councils, will also be relegated to 'advisory only' roles.
Those bodies traditionally make decisions around faculty hiring and promotion processes, in addition to curricula and other academic policies.
Elected faculty groups will be able to recommend and vote on changes to key matters, but final authority will rest with university trustees and top administrators.
Indiana University alumni blast board of trustees changes slipped into state budget
Other budget provisions order public colleges and universities to regularly review their degree programs and either cut those that fall beneath a certain enrollment threshold, or get state approval to continue offering the programs.
Schools could also be required to cut degrees that fail to meet the state's standards for 'quality, viability, and productivity.'
Chris Lowery, Indiana's higher education commissioner, told lawmakers in April that his commission had already adopted provisions to 'approve and disapprove' proposed or existing credentials offered by Indiana's post-secondaries. There are roughly 3,400 programs currently offered by school statewide. Lowery wasn't sure how many programs could — or should — be cut.
'I don't know what the number is, but what we know in any sector, when you get to that high of a quantity, you should be asking and questioning, 'Are we giving value to our fellow Hoosiers?' … We have work to do there,' he said before the House Education Committee last month. 'Although our colleges are doing a great job to prepare students for in-demand career opportunities … it's clear the number is too large here, and we can simply be more efficient and effective with outcomes.'
Another section of the budget bill specifically calls out Indiana University by eliminating alumni input in the selection of university trustees. It instead gives decision-making power over the board's membership to Braun.
Under current law, Indiana's governor appoints five members to IU's board and picks one student representative with the help of a student-led committee. Three other members must be IU graduates and are elected by other alumni.
The new state budget mandates all nine members to be appointed by the governor, and gives the executive leader the ability to, 'at any time,' remove and replace a board member who was previously elected by the IU alumni.
Braun defended the policy move Wednesday, emphasizing that just a 'fraction' of IU alumni participated in past votes to elect trustees.
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
11 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Sen. Brian Strickland enters race to succeed Georgia's AG Chris Carr
The Brief State Senators Brian Strickland and Bill Cowsert have entered the race to succeed Georgia Attorney General Chris Carr, who is running for governor in 2026. Strickland, a McDonough attorney, launched his campaign Tuesday, highlighting his record on conservative policies like the heartbeat bill and constitutional carry. Cowsert, a former Senate majority leader, announced his campaign in April, pledging to prioritize public safety and crack down on illegal immigration and crime. ATLANTA - The race to become Georgia's next attorney general is beginning to take shape, with two Republican lawmakers officially in the running to replace Attorney General Chris Carr. What we know Carr, who is not seeking reelection as he pursues a bid for governor in 2026, leaves an open seat that is drawing early interest. On Tuesday, State Sen. Brian Strickland launched his campaign during an event at Liberty Plaza in Atlanta. Strickland, a McDonough attorney who has served in the state Senate since 2018, highlighted his record on conservative policies, including support for the "heartbeat bill," constitutional carry, and mental health reform. Standing alongside his wife, Lindsey, he told reporters he would work to uphold Georgia's conservative values if elected. GEORGIA POLITICAL STORIES Strickland is expected to face Athens State Sen. Bill Cowsert in the Republican primary. Cowsert, a former Senate majority leader, chairs the Senate committee investigating Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis and her prosecution of former President Donald Trump. He announced his candidacy in April, vowing to tackle crime and illegal immigration. PREVIOUS STORY: Georgia Attorney General race: Sen. Bill Cowsert announces campaign As of Tuesday afternoon, no Democratic candidates had formally entered the race.


Newsweek
11 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Marjorie Taylor Greene Partially Agrees With Elon Musk on Trump-Backed Bill
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Georgia Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene partially backed Elon Musk Tuesday in his criticism of President Donald Trump's "big, beautiful bill" that recently passed the House of Representatives and is under debate in the Senate. The Context The Trump-backed reconciliation package passed the House last month following weeks of negotiations in which House Speaker Mike Johnson wrangled votes from the ultraconservative and more centrist factions of the GOP. While Trump praised the measure in its current form, Senate Republicans have made it clear that they plan to make significant changes to it before it passes the upper chamber. Musk, meanwhile, has repeatedly criticized the bill, most recently calling it a "disgusting abomination," saying it was filled with "outrageous pork" that would balloon the federal deficit and undo the work by the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene is pictured arriving for a House Republican meeting at the U.S. Capitol on May 20 in Washington, D.C. (Photo by) Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene is pictured arriving for a House Republican meeting at the U.S. Capitol on May 20 in Washington, D.C. (Photo by) What To Know "Congresswoman, what do you make of Elon Musk criticizing the 'One Big Beautiful Bill?'" a reporter asked Greene in Washington, D.C., on Tuesday. "Well, you know, I have to agree with him on one hand," the Republican firebrand responded. "I always love it when Americans are angry at the federal government and express it. I think that should've been happening for years now. I mean, we're $36 trillion in debt for a reason." Greene, one of Trump's staunchest supporters in Congress, went on to criticize the Biden administration's initiatives on renewable energy, its handling of the economy and more. "Unfortunately, in the 'One Big Beautiful Bill,' we had to spend some money to right the ship and pass President Trump's campaign promises" on issues including border security and immigration enforcement, tax cuts and "America First energy." Greene is among three House Republicans who have voiced their agreement with Musk's criticisms. Kentucky Representative Thomas Massie re-shared Musk's post on X, formerly Twitter, ripping into the bill, writing, "He's right." Representative Warren Davidson of Ohio also appeared to agree, sharing another post from Musk that said, "Congress is making America bankrupt." Massie and Davidson voted against the bill in the House. Greene voted in favor of it but said she did not read through a portion of the measure related to artificial intelligence (AI) when it was initially up for vote. Greene said the provision violates states' rights, writing on X on Tuesday: "Full transparency, I did not know about this section on pages 278-279 of the OBBB that strips states of the right to make laws or regulate AI for 10 years. I am adamantly OPPOSED to this and it is a violation of state rights and I would have voted NO if I had known this was in there." "We have no idea what AI will be capable of in the next 10 years and giving it free rein and tying states hands is potentially dangerous," she added. Greene said that if the Senate doesn't strip the provision from the version of the bill that's sent back to the House for final approval, she won't back it, which could complicate House GOP leadership's effort to pass the Trump-backed package. The White House responded to Musk's X posts during Tuesday's press briefing. "Look, the president already knows where Elon Musk stood on this bill. It doesn't change the president's opinion," White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters. "This is one big, beautiful bill, and he's sticking to it." What People Are Saying Senate Majority Leader John Thune told reporters: "We obviously respect everything that Elon did with DOGE. On this particular issue, we have a difference of opinion ... he's entitled to that opinion. We're going to proceed full speed ahead." Republican Senator Thom Tillis of North Carolina said of Musk's criticisms: "He's entitled to his opinion." Asked by Politico whether Musk's criticism would affect amendments to the bill, Tillis said: "No." Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer waved around a printout of Musk's post and told reporters: "I agree with Elon Musk!" What Happens Next Trump recently gave Senate Republicans a July 4 deadline to pass the bill and get it to his desk.
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The Memo: Musk drops bomb on Trump's ‘big, beautiful bill'
Elon Musk dropped a rhetorical bomb on President Trump's plans to pass a massive budget bill on Tuesday. Musk, the world's richest man, excoriated legislation that Trump calls big and beautiful as 'a disgusting abomination.' He also called the legislation 'outrageous' and 'pork-filled.' Referring to members of the House who had passed the bill and sent it along to the Senate, Musk added, 'Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong. You know it.' The remarks were all the more striking for coming just days after Musk departed from his role with the quasi-official Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). His departure was marked by a joint appearance with Trump in the Oval Office, at which they paid tribute to one another. Musk had expressed misgivings about the spending legislation in an interview broadcast on 'CBS Sunday Morning' this past weekend, musing that while such a bill could indeed be either big or beautiful, 'I don't know if it can be both.' GOP leaders on Capitol Hill thought they had been able to assuage Musk's concerns. Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) told reporters on Tuesday that he had spoken to Musk for 20 minutes the previous day. Johnson, who had to go through arduous efforts to get the bill passed in the House, said that in his Monday conversation, 'I extolled all the virtues of the bill, and he seemed to understand that. We had a very friendly conversation about it.' That left Johnson blindsided by the billionaire's rhetorical barrage on Tuesday. Musk's latest remarks were 'very disappointing' and 'terribly wrong,' Johnson lamented. But Musk's characteristically combative intervention raises two bigger questions. One is whether it will land so hard among Republican senators that it could capsize the bill itself. The other is whether it presages a larger willingness on Musk's behalf to go against the wishes of Trump, the president whom Musk spent more than $250 million getting elected — and who gave him enormous power at the heart of government. The Trump-backed budget bill, which also includes a $4 trillion increase in the debt ceiling, already faced uncertain prospects in the Senate. Republicans hold 53 seats in the 100-member body, but fiscal hawks and more moderate members alike have yet to signal they are willing to back the legislation. Sens. Rand Paul (Ky.), Ron Johnson (Wis.) and Mike Lee (Utah) are all in the first category, expressing concern that the bill fails to curb the long stretch of budget deficits that have created an astronomical national debt. The debt currently stands at around $36 trillion. At the other end of the GOP ideological spectrum, many insiders are watching Sens. Susan Collins (Maine) and Lisa Murkowski (Alaska) for signs of how hard they will resist proposed changes to Medicaid that are projected to cause millions of Americans to lose their health insurance. Musk is aligned with the first camp. After Musk's initial blast on Tuesday, Paul took to social media to write, 'I agree with Elon. We have both seen the massive waste in government spending and we know another $5 trillion in debt is a huge mistake.' Musk, in turn, amplified Paul's message to his 220 million followers on the social platform X, which he owns. Musk also reposted critiques of the legislation from Lee, who said the Senate 'must' make the bill better, and from Rep. Thomas Massie (Ky.), one of two House Republicans to vote against the legislation in the lower chamber. Musk's alignment with Paul was especially notable on a day when Trump had lambasted the Kentucky senator for his reluctance to back the legislation. Trump had written on social media Tuesday morning that Paul had 'very little understanding' of what was in the spending bill, adding, 'He loves voting 'NO' on everything, he thinks it's good politics, but it's not.' In a second post, Trump complained that Paul 'never has any practical or constructive ideas. His ideas are actually crazy (losers!). The people of Kentucky can't stand him.' White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt sought to swat aside Musk's criticisms during Tuesday's media briefing. 'The president already knows where Elon Musk stood on this bill,' Leavitt said. 'It doesn't change the president's opinion. This is one big, beautiful bill, and he's sticking to it.' But GOP senators are not quite so nonchalant. Johnson, the Wisconsin senator and fiscal hawk, told Politico that Musk's social media blasts 'got spread around pretty quickly' within the Republican conference. GOP senators will also not have missed the implicit threat in a later social media post from Musk. 'In November next year, we fire all politicians who betrayed the American people,' he wrote. Such a message raises the specter of Musk using some of his enormous wealth to finance primary challenges to incumbents — despite a recent statement that he was likely to curb his political spending. For Trump, the danger is that Musk will grow increasingly willing to voice his discontent. Trump, of course, has no more elections to run. But Musk's enormous X megaphone and his influential position near the apex of the online right makes him a highly dangerous potential critic. Relations between Trump and Musk have not fully degraded yet, of course. But Tuesday's messages from Musk will disconcert the White House as much as GOP leaders on Capitol Hill. The Memo is a reported column by Niall Stanage. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.