Idaho Legislature's budget committee seeks $2M funding cut for Boise State, University of Idaho
The Idaho Legislature's budget committee is attempting to cut $2 million in ongoing general fund money from both Boise State University and the University of Idaho.
A divided Joint Finance-Appropriations Committee, or JFAC, on Tuesday took up the fiscal year 2026 budget enhancements for the state's colleges and universities. JFAC sets every budget for every state agency and department.
The higher education budget was one of the final large budgets JFAC has set during the 2025 legislative session as legislators seek to wind down the session.
Rep. Elaine Price, R-Coeur d'Alene, led the effort to reduce the funding for Boise State University and University of Idaho. Price, who has an accounting associate degree from North Idaho College, and JFAC did not make corresponding reductions to Idaho State University or any of the state's other colleges.
When asked for an explanation of the cuts, Rep. Josh Tanner, R-Eagle, said he was concerned the two universities were incorporating elements of diversity, equity and inclusion, or DEI, into programs despite the state prohibiting colleges and universities from using state money for such programs.
'I've had a real tough time with universities,' Tanner, a graduate of Boise State, said. 'The more I dig in, the more frustrated I actually get. The more I actually look into – whether you look into the DEI aspects, critical race theory, the actual professors and some of the classes that are actually being taught – it saddens me to see the direction that our universities have taken.'
Rep. James Petzke, R-Meridian, a Boise State and Harvard Extension School grad, and Sen. Codi Galloway, R-Boise, who attended Brigham Young University for undergrad and Northwest Nazarene University for her graduate degree, attempted to push back against the $2 million cuts and the suggestion universities were using state money on DEI programs.
'If this is related to DEI, I guess I'm a little bit confused, because there's been language in the university's budget the last couple of years that has specifically prohibited the universities from using any state appropriated funds on anything DEI related,' Petzke said. 'So this reduction would not impact any DEI programs that were at the universities, which to my knowledge, have all been eliminated thanks to the State Board's actions.'
Galloway was even more outspoken. Galloway said she had concerns about the use of DEI programs several years ago. But Galloway said college and university officials and the State Board of Education have made changes to restrict and eliminate DEI programs.
'I would argue now, today, that there has been a course change, there's been a correction, and it's not over, and there's more to be done,' Galloway said. 'But if we continue to punish and be punitive to our universities, we lose our negotiating power. We cannot ask people to make change, watch them make change and then continue to punish them. That is not how it works in negotiations. That is not how it works in the real business world.' Galloway warned that continuing to punish universities after they make changes could backfire.
'The money here is not very important,' Galloway continued. '$2 million, when you take the balance out, the money is small. A message we send is big. If we ask our agencies to make changes, they make significant changes and we refuse to change course with them, then our power of the purse is no longer relevant. They have no reason to listen to us or to make accommodations, because it doesn't matter.'
Galloway pushed unsuccessfully to pass the higher education budget without cutting funding from Boise State and the University of Idaho, but it failed on votes of 5-5 among Senate JFAC members and 5-5 among House members.
Price's motion to cut $2 million in funding from both universities also produced a 5-5 vote among the Senate JFAC members, but House JFAC members voted 8-2 to support it, yielding a 13-7 vote among all of JFAC.
Without formal published rules in place, JFAC co-chairs Rep. Wendy Horman, R-Idaho Falls, and Sen. Scott Grow, R-Eagle, have different interpretations of JFACs voting procedures, the Idaho Capital Sun previously reported.
In adherence to the Senate interpretation of JFAC voting procedures that Grow supports, Grow sent the colleges and universities budget with the funding cuts to the Idaho Senate on Tuesday because that is the legislative chamber where it failed to achieve a majority vote. It will be up to Senate Republican leaders to decide what to do with the budget.
The higher education budget provides funding for more than just Boise State University and University of Idaho.
The higher education budget provides funding for all of Idaho's public universities and community colleges. Compared to the current fiscal year 2025 budget, the fiscal year 2026 higher education budget JFAC set Tuesday includes an increase of $3.2 million in total funding, and a 5.6% increase from the current budget.
The higher education budget will be sent next to the Idaho Senate for consideration. In order for the budget to take effect, it must pass the Idaho Senate and Idaho House of Representatives with a simple majority of votes in each legislative chamber and not be vetoed by Gov. Brad Little.
JFAC is scheduled to reconvene at 8 a.m. on Wednesday to resume setting budgets.
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
Fox News
10 hours ago
- Fox News
Americans' perception of discrimination against Black people dropped in last four years
A new report shows that slightly less than half of U.S. adults believe that Black and Hispanic people face "a great deal" or "quite a bit" of discrimination in the United States. According to the Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll, the number of people saying Asian people and Black people are experiencing discrimination has dropped since the last time the survey was conducted in April 2021. Four in 10 say that Black and Hispanic people face "quite a bit" or "a great deal" of discrimination. Three in 10 say the same about Asian people, and one in 10 say it about White people, according to the report. The previous Associated Press-NORC poll was conducted a year after the death of George Floyd when protests occurred all across the country calling for an end to racial discrimination in police activities. The last survey showed that 61% of U.S. adults said there was a great deal or quite a bit of discrimination against Black Americans. The new survey also noted that while many groups experience discrimination, the report showed skepticism that diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs are effective at mitigating discrimination. "Many say DEI programs do not make a difference and roughly 3 in 10 think DEI initiatives increase discrimination against most racial and ethnic groups including White people. About a third feel DEI efforts are reducing discrimination against women, Hispanic people, and Asian people while 4 in 10 say the same about Black people," the report stated. The Philadelphia Tribune interviewed Americans to get their reactions to the latest poll. Claudine Brider, a 48-year-old Black Democrat in Compton, California, told the Tribune that "the concept of DEI has made the workplace difficult for Black people and women in new ways." "Anytime they're in a space that they're not expected to be, like seeing a Black girl in an engineering course... they are seen as only getting there because of those factors," Brider said. "It's all negated by someone saying, 'You're only here to meet a quota.'" Gilbert, Arizona resident Pete Parra said that "DEI is making things harder for racial minorities now." He worries about how his two adult Hispanic sons will be treated when they apply for work. "I'm not saying automatically just give it to my sons," said Parra, who leans toward the Democratic Party. But he's concerned that now factors other than merit may take priority. "If they get passed over for something," he said, "they're not going to know (why)." Many proponents of DEI argue that the effort corrects historical injustices and systemic inequities. However, conservatives say that it promotes division instead, leading DEI initiatives to face opposition from conservative groups and state legislatures across the U.S.
Boston Globe
13 hours ago
- Boston Globe
‘Great news but a weird twist.' After the NIH moved to restore hundreds of grants, researchers remain in limbo.
Advertisement In New England, 63 of those grants, worth $126 million, are set to be restored, according to a Globe analysis based on the The grants were restored as the result of a lawsuit filed by the American Public Health Association and 16 state attorneys general arguing that the NIH improperly ended funding tied to topics like gender identity, health disparities, vaccine hesitancy, and DEI efforts. The judge in the case ruled in June that the terminations were 'illegal and void' and ordered the government to immediately make the funds available. The Trump administration has appealed the decision. Advertisement The grants are a fraction of the more than $3.1 billion in funding from the National Science Foundation and the Department of Health and Human Services that the Trump administration has canceled across New England. At a status hearing on the case Monday, attorneys representing the public health association said that more than 50 of its roughly 300 affected research grants across the country have not been reinstated, and that the NIH has not provided a timeline for when all grants will be restored. Researchers face other obstacles as well. At Harvard, virtually all federal funding remains frozen as part of the administration's broader assault on the university. Others face reduced staffing, due to layoffs, and shortened deadlines to complete their research. And funding at the federal level remains subject to sudden reversals, as shown Tuesday night when the White House In a statement Thursday, the NIH told the Globe it 'has been working to reinstate grants to comply with the court's order.' Scott Delaney, a Harvard scientist and co-creator of Grant Watch, said many researchers remain wary despite the win because of further appeals and reviews. 'Every indication is that NIH will continue to cut research on trans health and on DEI. They still remain hostile to broad bodies of research, and they continue to ask researchers to rewrite their grants to avoid certain topics,' said Delaney, who lost his own NIH funding and received a But many are pressing ahead despite the obstacles and hoping for the best. Advertisement Nancy Krieger, a professor of social epidemiology at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, learned this month that her funding would be restored. She said that despite feeling vindicated by US District Court Judge William G. Young's ruling, she cannot access the funds due to the federal freeze on funds to Harvard. Since 2019, Krieger and her team have been working to measure the impact of six types of discrimination — including racism, sexism, and ageism — on health. The researchers enrolled 699 patients who completed two study questionnaires online and at three Boston community health centers — including Fenway Health, Mattapan Community Health Center, and Harvard Street Neighborhood Health Center in Dorchester — to test how discrimination contributes to psychological distress and sleep disorders. 'We can resume the work because we had completed all data collection and we were in the phase of data analysis and manuscript preparation,' Krieger said. 'Whether or not the funding ever truly gets reinstated for my grant — and I would like that it is — it's important, given the complexities, to make sure these things go from a court order to reality.' At Tufts, the school lost and then suddenly regained a pipeline for young talent, though several young scientists lost out in the process. The university hosts one of just 22 NIH-sponsored programs in the country that trains a diverse group of postdoctoral scholars in both research and teaching. The program, called the Institutional Research Career and Academic Development Award, or IRACDA, focuses on underrepresented groups. 'We were ramping up for another five years after earning highly competitive funding last fall,' said Mitch McVey, program director and professor of biology at Tufts. 'Then the new administration came in, and everything changed.' Advertisement When the NIH terminated funding, four incoming applicants had their offers rescinded just one day after receiving them. Marissa Maroni, 28, celebrated the news with her husband and prepared to move back to her home state. 'It felt like the right next step, personally and professionally,' said Maroni, who is finishing her PhD at the University of Pennsylvania. 'But just a day later, I got an email saying the program was canceled. It was incredibly disheartening.' The loss also affects Bunker Hill Community College, University of Massachusetts Boston, and Suffolk University, where IRACDA scholars like Maroni were slated to teach next year. McVey said Tufts might extend the offers again to the four applicants but, 'We're trying to balance the risk involved here, which would be that if the government wins the appeal, the funding will likely be terminated again. We don't want to put the scholars in a position where their job security is always in jeopardy, so we're trying to figure out how to best navigate this situation. It's not easy.' At Yale, nine NIH grants that were terminated are in the process of reinstatement. Four of those belong to John Pachankis, a Yale School of Public Health professor who has spent the past 20 years investigating why people in the LGBTQ+ community are at higher risk for depression, anxiety, and suicide. The sudden March terminations not only disrupted years of research but also halted the rollout of promising mental health interventions. One of Pachankis's halted trials aimed to train front-line mental health providers working at 90 LGBTQ+ community centers across 35 states in cognitive-behavioral therapy to treat depression, anxiety, and substance use. Advertisement 'Right before the funding termination, we learned that our trained mental health providers had started delivering our cognitive-behavioral therapy to over 4,000 LGBT people in just four months,' he said. The funding cut prevented them from studying the longer-term impact of the therapy and ways to sustain it in local communities. Restarting the work has been slow and resource-intensive, he said. It requires updating ethics approvals, reconvening data safety review boards, updating clinical trials registries, drafting now-overdue progress reports, and restarting trials enrollment while no longer having sufficient staff to do this work. 'The research infrastructure took years to build, was collapsed in a day, and will take months if not longer to rebuild,' Pachankis said. 'My confidence in future federal funding for this research remains shaken, but my team's commitment to asking and answering important scientific questions isn't going away.' Meanwhile, at Brown, Moitra is figuring out how to move forward with his research. Between 2022 and early 2024, he and his team recruited 240 LGBTQ+ participants, offering two counseling sessions to study the mental health impacts from the pandemic. After funding was pulled, Moitra said, they lost 40 participants' worth of data that had timed out after those participants received just one counseling session. Now that the grant has been reinstated, Moitra's team is left racing against the clock as the deadline for the funding to be used remains Aug. 31. The researchers are applying for a no-cost extension to allow them to complete the work without requesting additional funds. 'After five-plus months of uncertainty, we were moving on,' Moitra said. 'It's hard to scramble it all back together.' Advertisement Sarah Rahal can be reached at
New York Post
15 hours ago
- New York Post
Texas Roadhouse hit with civil rights complaint alleging DEI discrimination in hiring practices
A conservative legal group has launched a civil rights complaint against the Texas Roadhouse restaurant chain, alleging it illegally discriminates by using Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI), gender and racial demographic criteria in its hiring practices. The complaint, filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission by America First Legal (AFL), accused Texas Roadhouse of using race and gender as factors in determining who should be appointed to its Board of Directors, tracking employees' race, gender and ethnicity, as well as running 'reputational risk' to its business due to its DEI policies. AFL is alleging that Texas Roadhouse is in violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. 'The evidence demonstrates that the Company's hiring, promotion, and recruitment practices violate state and federal law. The evidence also demonstrates that the Company has prioritized unlawful diversity, equity, and inclusion programs and policies over shareholder value,' the complaint alleged. Texas Roadhouse wrote that it is committed to 'attracting, retaining, engaging, recognizing, and developing a workforce that mirrors the diversity of our guests' and provided a chart breaking down the percentages of their employees and managers who were either women or people of color in its 2024 10-K annual report. 3 A Texas Roadhouse restaurant in Teterboro, NJ on Nov. 17, 2024. Christopher Sadowski The AFL filing also said that, because of increased pressure from the government and investors to disclose its Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) targets, including targets related to diversity and inclusion efforts, the restaurant chain is exposing itself to reputational risk as well as the threat of potential litigation. The complaint accuses Texas Roadhouse of acting with an 'inappropriate disregard of your fiduciary duties to Texas Roadhouse and its shareholders.' According to the Texas Roadhouse 2024 sustainability report, the company takes DEI factors such as gender and race into consideration when determining nominees to its Board of Directors, along with other factors such as Board experience and financial acumen. 3 Texas Roadhouse wrote that it is committed to 'attracting, retaining, engaging, recognizing, and developing a workforce that mirrors the diversity of our guests.' Christopher Sadowski The report also touts professional development programs geared towards identity, including a Women's Leadership Summit and African American Leadership Summit. 'Texas Roadhouse's policies are a relic of an era where DEI contaminated American culture with the false belief that good intentions make discrimination okay,' America First Legal Counsel Will Scolinos told Fox News Digital in a statement. Diversity, Equity and Inclusion initiatives have been in retreat in corporate America since President Donald Trump returned to office. Trump signed a flurry of executive orders targeting 'illegal DEI' starting on his first day back in the Oval Office, which banned federal agencies from contracting with companies that engage in DEI policies. 3 According to the Texas Roadhouse 2024 sustainability report, the company takes DEI factors such as gender and race into consideration. Christopher Sadowski Companies like Disney, Paramount and Facebook have all rolled back or eliminated their DEI programs. Other companies, such as Costco and Apple, have resisted activist shareholder pressure to reform or eliminate their DEI initiatives. Cracker Barrel, another restaurant chain, is also facing an AFL civil rights complaint over its DEI policies. The complaint alleged that Cracker Barrel's 'Business Resource Groups' discriminate on the basis of race and sex by only offering employment benefits to workers who fit certain demographic criteria. Texas Roadhouse did not respond to Fox News Digital's request for comment.
