Latest news with #Haverford
USA Today
5 days ago
- Entertainment
- USA Today
Buy now, return later, money back guaranteed. How America scores free stuff
Have free returns gone too far? Shoppers return air conditioners after a heatwave, TVs after the Super Bowl, even American flags after the Fourth of July to Costco, Home Depot and other stores. When Tom Haverford goes camping with coworkers in a 2011 episode of the NBC comedy 'Parks and Recreation,' he tricks out his tent with an Xbox, fondue pot, panini press, soft-serve ice cream maker, DJ roomba, even a real bed. 'How do you afford all this stuff?' he's asked. 'I just return it the next day and claim it was defective,' replies Haverford, played by actor Aziz Ansari, while sprawled in a hammock enjoying an electric scalp massage. 'The key is crying a lot. No one likes to hear a grown man cry.' Like most sitcom material, the antic is borrowed from real life. Liberal return policies have inspired sketchy behaviors such as 'wardrobing' – when people buy expensive outfits for a special occasion and tuck the tags out of sight so they can return them the next day. Now, in a practice known as 'weekend rentals,' shoppers take home a leaf blower or a hedge trimmer only to return it when they're done with it. With high inflation and tight budgets, Paco Underhill, author of 'Why We Buy: The Science of Shopping,' says this 'rent the runway' mindset is only spreading. People are 'renting' and returning more things: Plants for open houses, outdoor tables and chairs for a party and giant televisions to watch the Super Bowl. Pressure washers and paint sprayers are discarded after home-improvement projects. Some people even bring back the ladders they used to string holiday lights from their rooflines. 'So many of the things that we buy are based on some form of immediate need and often, when that's over, it's just over,' Underhill said. 'Renting' from Costco? Retail staffers who process returns at big-box stores frequently grouse online about 'rentals through the returns desk' or the 'service desk rental program.' And they say they can predict product returns by the seasons. At Costco, where a "risk-free 100% satisfaction guarantee" gives members an unlimited grace period to bring back most purchases, snowblowers flood the returns area after the last winter storm, portable generators and chainsaws after hurricane season and air conditioning units after the summer heatwave. A Costco employee who has worked with the company in multiple states says trees, inflatables and other holiday decor get stacked seven feet high after Christmas. Some members fly Old Glory only to return the American flag after July 4, according to the staffer who also spoke on the condition of anonymity. Others 'rent' jewelry for black-tie events, including one customer who returned three $2,000-plus necklaces in one summer. And just this month, the employee processed a return for $500 worth of meat, cheese and dip left over from a wedding with fewer guests than expected. A couple of years ago at a Connecticut warehouse, a Costco member showed up at the returns desk in early November lugging an animatronic scarecrow, a 10-foot-tall witch and bags of candy from a haunted tractor ride. With no room at home to store his Halloween haul, he demanded a full refund. The store's manager explained that Costco isn't in the rentals business but processed the return anyway, an employee told USA TODAY on the condition of anonymity for fear of losing her job. When the same member turned up in early January with thousands of dollars worth of inflatable snowmen, reindeer yard decor and string lights from a winter wonderland-themed tractor ride, Costco turned him down. Other returns, the employee said, that have been accepted at her warehouse: massage guns after the member worked out a muscle knot and a fully assembled gingerbread house because 'it looks bad.' They returned dirty toilets and rugs. Then came the backlash. Shoppers who abuse return policies often excuse their behavior as a one-off or say they're just doing what everyone else is. After all, they say, what's the harm in swindling a megabucks corporation? 'Consumers often justify their actions by believing that the benefit to them outweighs the harm to the company,' said Ayelet Fishbach, professor of behavioral science and marketing at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business. How money-back guarantees caught on The money-back guarantee dates back at least as far as the mid-1700s when an innovative small-town English potter Josiah Wedgwood used the gimmick to lure customers and close sales in the fine china market, according to USA TODAY research. In America, businessman Potter Palmer embraced the concept a century later when he encouraged well-heeled customers of his dry goods store in Chicago to take home merchandise on approval. Marshall Field, who took over from Palmer, carried on that legacy with his namesake department store's no-questions-asked return policy. The policy soon caught on elsewhere. In the late 1800s and early 1900s, Sears catalogs were printed with the slogan: 'Satisfaction guaranteed or your money cheerfully refunded.' With successive generations of merchandising legends, from James Cash Penney of JCPenney to Sam Walton of Walmart, 'the customer is always right' became an article of faith. But the returns free-for-all really took off with the advent of internet shopping as e-commerce companies jockeyed for shoppers' eyeballs and their wallets. The competitive pressure forced more brick-and-mortar establishments to loosen their return policies, too, according to Zac Rogers, an associate professor of operations and supply chain management at Colorado State University. Zappos' customer-centric return policy was so successful that eventually Amazon bought out the retailer for $1.2 billion. 'What e-commerce has done is reset consumer expectations for the ways that retailers should behave,' Rogers said. But goosing sales with lenient returns quickly turned into a logistical and costly headache for retailers. Returns were projected to reach $890 billion in 2024, according to a report by the National Retail Federation and Happy Returns, a UPS company. Retailers estimated that nearly 17% of their annual sales in 2024 would be returned. The vast majority (93%) of retailers point to retail fraud and other exploitative behaviors as a major issue for their business, citing the increased operations expenses to process returns and increased shipping costs. "They created this monster that they now have to deal with,' Rogers said. America's $890 billion bad habit With so much merchandise headed for liquidation centers or landfills, many retailers have responded by shrinking their refund windows or by charging return fees. Despite the high costs, retailers are still cautious about how much they rein in liberal return policies, worried that discouraging returns will discourage people from making the purchases in the first place. But they aren't the only ones stuck footing the bill. 'As a vendor, we are required to accept 100% of the returns of our products, no questions asked, regardless of the reason,' an executive for a vendor told USA TODAY on the condition of anonymity because he feared losing business from Costco and other big-box stores. Return rates can run as high as 20% or more depending on the product, he said. It's not just lost sales vendors have to absorb. They have to cover the cost of shipping returned products back to the warehouse and all other associated fees. A few years ago, Costco briefly considered narrowing the return window to 90 days on outdoor power equipment, but management rejected the proposal, according to the executive, and vendors have paid the price. When he worked for a company that sold lawnmowers to Costco, the lawnmowers would fly out the door in the spring, only to fly back in come October. 'We would get used lawnmowers back and they were not even our brand,' he said. 'People would go buy a new mower, put their old mower in the box and return it.' That behavior 'is not the norm,' he said. 'But it's not the exception either.' Is a returns crackdown coming? Neil Saunders, a retail analyst at the research and analytics firm GlobalData, said he expects to see more retailers crack down on bad behavior. Home Depot, sometimes referred to as "Rent a Depot" or 'Returns Depot' because of returns abuses, recently instituted a 7-day return policy on pressure washers, dehumidifiers, window and portable air conditioners and generators. A spokeswoman denied that frequent returns were behind the policy shift. 'We added the 7-day return policy for categories that our customers need in the event of a natural disaster,' Beth Marlowe said in a written statement. 'By shortening the return window, we can have more inventory on hand to quickly move to the communities where these products are needed most.' Whatever the motivation, the new policy has slowed returns in these product categories, according to store employees. A Home Depot worker in Virginia, who spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of losing his job, said he used to watch customers return window AC units typically within two to three weeks. After the new policy took effect in June, he overheard some customers saying they planned to buy an air conditioning unit to cool off during a heatwave. When they approached him, he pointed out the new policy and they left without buying one. But what about customers with legit returns? When Josh Powell, a 31-year-old organ transplant coordinator from Sherwood, Arkansas, fired up the pressure washer he bought online from Home Depot to clean the siding on his new house, it began belching black smoke. So he packed up the big box and crammed into his compact SUV for the 10-minute drive to his local store. With a full refund in hand, he bought another pressure washer on the spot, but this was before the 7-day policy went into effect. Now, Powell worries what will happen if he has a problem outside that window. Too often, he says manufacturers make it difficult to return defective goods. Will he get stuck with a $500 lemon? 'People are always looking for the best benefit for them and they will take advantage of any policy they can find, so I understand why certain retailers are cracking down,' he said. At the same time, he says he would go 'full Karen' if a retailer refused to return a faulty product. 'I don't know what the answer is,' Powell said.
Indianapolis Star
5 days ago
- Entertainment
- Indianapolis Star
Buy now, return later, money back guaranteed. How America scores free stuff
When Tom Haverford goes camping with coworkers in a 2011 episode of the NBC comedy 'Parks and Recreation,' he tricks out his tent with an Xbox, fondue pot, panini press, soft-serve ice cream maker, DJ roomba, even a real bed. 'How do you afford all this stuff?' he's asked. 'I just return it the next day and claim it was defective,' replies Haverford, played by actor Aziz Ansari, while sprawled in a hammock enjoying an electric scalp massage. 'The key is crying a lot. No one likes to hear a grown man cry.' Like most sitcom material, the antic is borrowed from real life. Liberal return policies have inspired sketchy behaviors such as 'wardrobing' – when people buy expensive outfits for a special occasion and tuck the tags out of sight so they can return them the next day. Now, in a practice known as 'weekend rentals,' shoppers take home a leaf blower or a hedge trimmer only to return it when they're done with it. With high inflation and tight budgets, Paco Underhill, author of 'Why We Buy: The Science of Shopping,' says this 'rent the runway' mindset is only spreading. People are 'renting' and returning more things: Plants for open houses, outdoor tables and chairs for a party and giant televisions to watch the Super Bowl. Pressure washers and paint sprayers are discarded after home-improvement projects. Some people even bring back the ladders they used to string holiday lights from their rooflines. 'So many of the things that we buy are based on some form of immediate need and often, when that's over, it's just over,' Underhill said. Retail staffers who process returns at big-box stores frequently grouse online about 'rentals through the returns desk' or the 'service desk rental program.' And they say they can predict product returns by the seasons. At Costco, where a "risk-free 100% satisfaction guarantee" gives members an unlimited grace period to bring back most purchases, snowblowers flood the returns area after the last winter storm, portable generators and chainsaws after hurricane season and air conditioning units after the summer heatwave. A Costco employee who has worked with the company in multiple states says trees, inflatables and other holiday decor get stacked seven feet high after Christmas. Some members fly Old Glory only to return the American flag after July 4, according to the staffer who also spoke on the condition of anonymity. Others 'rent' jewelry for black-tie events, including one customer who returned three $2,000-plus necklaces in one summer. And just this month, the employee processed a return for $500 worth of meat, cheese and dip left over from a wedding with fewer guests than expected. A couple of years ago at a Connecticut warehouse, a Costco member showed up at the returns desk in early November lugging an animatronic scarecrow, a 10-foot-tall witch and bags of candy from a haunted tractor ride. With no room at home to store his Halloween haul, he demanded a full refund. The store's manager explained that Costco isn't in the rentals business but processed the return anyway, an employee told USA TODAY on the condition of anonymity for fear of losing her job. When the same member turned up in early January with thousands of dollars worth of inflatable snowmen, reindeer yard decor and string lights from a winter wonderland-themed tractor ride, Costco turned him down. Other returns, the employee said, that have been accepted at her warehouse: massage guns after the member worked out a muscle knot and a fully assembled gingerbread house because 'it looks bad.' They returned dirty toilets and rugs. Then came the backlash. Shoppers who abuse return policies often excuse their behavior as a one-off or say they're just doing what everyone else is. After all, they say, what's the harm in swindling a megabucks corporation? 'Consumers often justify their actions by believing that the benefit to them outweighs the harm to the company,' said Ayelet Fishbach, professor of behavioral science and marketing at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business. The money-back guarantee dates back at least as far as the mid-1700s when an innovative small-town English potter Josiah Wedgwood used the gimmick to lure customers and close sales in the fine china market, according to USA TODAY research. In America, businessman Potter Palmer embraced the concept a century later when he encouraged well-heeled customers of his dry goods store in Chicago to take home merchandise on approval. Marshall Field, who took over from Palmer, carried on that legacy with his namesake department store's no-questions-asked return policy. The policy soon caught on elsewhere. In the late 1800s and early 1900s, Sears catalogs were printed with the slogan: 'Satisfaction guaranteed or your money cheerfully refunded.' With successive generations of merchandising legends, from James Cash Penney of JCPenney to Sam Walton of Walmart, 'the customer is always right' became an article of faith. But the returns free-for-all really took off with the advent of internet shopping as e-commerce companies jockeyed for shoppers' eyeballs and their wallets. The competitive pressure forced more brick-and-mortar establishments to loosen their return policies, too, according to Zac Rogers, an associate professor of operations and supply chain management at Colorado State University. Zappos' customer-centric return policy was so successful that eventually Amazon bought out the retailer for $1.2 billion. 'What e-commerce has done is reset consumer expectations for the ways that retailers should behave,' Rogers said. But goosing sales with lenient returns quickly turned into a logistical and costly headache for retailers. Returns were projected to reach $890 billion in 2024, according to a report by the National Retail Federation and Happy Returns, a UPS company. Retailers estimated that nearly 17% of their annual sales in 2024 would be returned. The vast majority (93%) of retailers point to retail fraud and other exploitative behaviors as a major issue for their business, citing the increased operations expenses to process returns and increased shipping costs. "They created this monster that they now have to deal with,' Rogers said. With so much merchandise headed for liquidation centers or landfills, many retailers have responded by shrinking their refund windows or by charging return fees. Despite the high costs, retailers are still cautious about how much they rein in liberal return policies, worried that discouraging returns will discourage people from making the purchases in the first place. But they aren't the only ones stuck footing the bill. 'As a vendor, we are required to accept 100% of the returns of our products, no questions asked, regardless of the reason,' an executive for a vendor told USA TODAY on the condition of anonymity because he feared losing business from Costco and other big-box stores. Return rates can run as high as 20% or more depending on the product, he said. It's not just lost sales vendors have to absorb. They have to cover the cost of shipping returned products back to the warehouse and all other associated fees. A few years ago, Costco briefly considered narrowing the return window to 90 days on outdoor power equipment, but management rejected the proposal, according to the executive, and vendors have paid the price. When he worked for a company that sold lawnmowers to Costco, the lawnmowers would fly out the door in the spring, only to fly back in come October. 'We would get used lawnmowers back and they were not even our brand,' he said. 'People would go buy a new mower, put their old mower in the box and return it.' That behavior 'is not the norm,' he said. 'But it's not the exception either.' Neil Saunders, a retail analyst at the research and analytics firm GlobalData, said he expects to see more retailers crack down on bad behavior. Home Depot, sometimes referred to as "Rent a Depot" or 'Returns Depot' because of returns abuses, recently instituted a 7-day return policy on pressure washers, dehumidifiers, window and portable air conditioners and generators. A spokeswoman denied that frequent returns were behind the policy shift. 'We added the 7-day return policy for categories that our customers need in the event of a natural disaster,' Beth Marlowe said in a written statement. 'By shortening the return window, we can have more inventory on hand to quickly move to the communities where these products are needed most.' Whatever the motivation, the new policy has slowed returns in these product categories, according to store employees. A Home Depot worker in Virginia, who spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of losing his job, said he used to watch customers return window AC units typically within two to three weeks. After the new policy took effect in June, he overheard some customers saying they planned to buy an air conditioning unit to cool off during a heatwave. When they approached him, he pointed out the new policy and they left without buying one. But what about customers with legit returns? When Josh Powell, a 31-year-old organ transplant coordinator from Sherwood, Arkansas, fired up the pressure washer he bought online from Home Depot to clean the siding on his new house, it began belching black smoke. So he packed up the big box and crammed into his compact SUV for the 10-minute drive to his local store. With a full refund in hand, he bought another pressure washer on the spot, but this was before the 7-day policy went into effect. Now, Powell worries what will happen if he has a problem outside that window. Too often, he says manufacturers make it difficult to return defective goods. Will he get stuck with a $500 lemon? 'People are always looking for the best benefit for them and they will take advantage of any policy they can find, so I understand why certain retailers are cracking down,' he said. At the same time, he says he would go 'full Karen' if a retailer refused to return a faulty product.
Daily Mail
28-05-2025
- Entertainment
- Daily Mail
Kylie Kelce gives rare glimpse into her and Jason's $6m home as they manage four young girls and two podcasts
The $6 million mansion Kylie and Jason Kelce share with their four children was on full display in the former NFL wife's latest Instagram video. The Kelces live in the wealthy Philadelphia suburb of Haverford, where they've made a compound out of three adjacent properties according to While announcing the return to her popular podcast following maternity leave, the 33-year-old Kylie offered fans a glimpse into her busy life as a mother to Bennett, 2, Elliotte, 4, and Wyatt, 5, and newly born Finnley. 'What are you doing?' Kylie is heard asking her rambunctious children as she tried to nurse her youngest. A follow-up question seemed particularly important: 'Why are you scooting on your butt like that?' Wyatt and Elliotte didn't pay her much attention and continued singing while Bennett became fixated on the camera. 'My hands are high, my feet are low, and this is how I pop see ko,' the two girls are heard singing. 'Pop pop see poo.' Kylie then warns them: 'don't use potty talk, please.' The day also included some phone calls with work colleagues, such as her producer that goes by 'Queen Emma.' 'Ooh, hey, Queen Emma!' Kylie is heard saying. 'No, this is a great time. Wait, she's available right now? Queen Emma, are we back? All right, give me five minutes.' With that, it was time for Jason – the retired Philadelphia Eagles center and Super Bowl champion – to tag in and look after the girls. 'Jason, you're on the clock!' Kyle yelled. 'Girls, mom's gotta go podcast.' The oldest Kelce daughters are seen enjoying an extra-large coloring table Even though she was surrounded by four children, Kylie still managed to take a work call Of course, Jason has his own popular podcast to worry about as well. He and brother Travis have continued doing New Heights, where Jason revealed he's only recently made it out of the house for the first time since the birth of Finnley. 'I was out of the house recently,' Jason said. 'I was not out of the house at all for like a month or two right after the season with a new baby and everything. But we're getting back out there now. We're having some fun.' As Jason told People, Finn's sisters quickly adapted to the new addition. 'They're getting there. I think the older two right away,' he said. 'They love trying to … they like being like mom, and they like being around the newborn. 'Our youngest, Benny, she took some warming up, but she's starting to get there,' he added. Jason has been outspoken about his efforts to improve security around the family home and even went before a zoning board to request specific upgrades, such as a security fence, according to
Yahoo
07-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
University presidents, Republican lawmakers spar over alleged antisemitism on campuses
College presidents faced off with lawmakers on the House Education and Workforce Committee on Wednesday in an at-times contentious congressional hearing examining alleged antisemitism on campus. But the school leaders' concessions and inability to explain why they didn't follow university policies to remove encampment demonstrations fell short of satisfying Republicans.. When pressed by House Republican Conference Chairwoman Lisa McClain "How'd that go?" DePaul University President Robert Manuel responded, "Not very well." "Your apologies are a little hollow," McClain responded. PHOTO: Rep. Lisa McClain speaks at a hearing of the House Committee on Education and Workforce at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C. , on May 7, 2025. (Michael Brochstein/Sipa USA via AP) The hearing, aimed at stopping the alleged spread of antisemitism at colleges and universities, featured the presidents of DePaul University, Haverford College and California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo. Dr. Jeffrey Armstrong of Cal Poly defended his school and its "vibrant" Jewish community. "We do not tolerate threatening activity," Armstrong said. "We deploy campus police whenever there is the potential for trouble, and they make arrests and file criminal charges when justified. In addition, when alleged antisemitism or harassment occurs, we investigate and impose immediate university discipline," he added. In an exchange with Haverford President Wendy Raymond, Rep. Elise Stefanik, R-N.Y., admonished Raymond for her university's lack of transparency in identifying the school's disciplinary actions. "For the American people watching, you still don't get it -- Haverford still doesn't get it," Stefanik said. "It's a very different testimony than the other presidents who are here today who are coming with specifics," she added. "So, again, this is completely unacceptable, and it's why this committee stepped in because higher education has failed to address the scourge of antisemitism, putting Jewish students a risk at Haverford and other campuses across the country." PHOTO: College Presidents Testify At House Hearing On Antisemitism On Campuses () MORE: Education Department freezes Harvard's research funding, seeking compliance with Trump administration Stefanik has led the charge against antisemitic conduct and harassment on campuses since the Oct. 7 Hamas attack in Israel. Her question -- does calling for the genocide of Jews constitute as hate speech on campus? -- became the highlight of the Education and Workforce Committee's historic Dec. 5, 2023, hearing with the presidents of Harvard University, the University of Pennsylvania, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology on combating antisemitism. But the hearing, called "Beyond the Ivy League," is a stark contrast from those featuring the schools on which the committee had typically focused its ire. This time, the university presidents prepared for Stefanik's grilling. The congresswoman asked if calling for the genocide of Jews is "protected speech" on Haverford's campus. "No, of course not," Raymond replied. "And what disciplinary action has been taken or would be taken if someone made that call?" Stefanik interjected. "Representative, there have been no such calls, and we would use all of our disciplinary actions to follow through on any such call," Raymond said. "I would never expect that to happen at Haverford, and if it would, we would deal with that swiftly." McClain told ABC News after her questioning in the hearing that it isn't Congress' job to get any of the presidents fired but that she thinks it should be "considered." "All options are on the table," McClain said. "Actions speak louder than words, right?" McClain added. "There has to be consequences to one's actions. And that's what's not happening at these universities. It's lip service." All the presidents distanced themselves from the answers made in the Harvard hearing and apologized to their respective Jewish communities for their inaction. "To our students, our parents, our faculty, our staff, our alumni and our friends, I am deeply sorry," Manuel said. "I know there are areas where we must and will do better." Manuel also spoke directly to two of his students who were harassed on campus last fall, including Michael Kaminsky, a junior who was in attendance at the hearing on Wednesday and said at a news conference on Capitol Hill on Tuesday that he was injured during an assault for being a Jewish American. "What happened to them was a hate crime. No one should ever be attacked because of who they are. I am sorry for the pain they experienced," he said. PHOTO: President of Haverford College Wendy Raymond and President of DePaul University Robert Manuel testify during a hearing before the House Education and Workforce Committee at the Rayburn House Office Building, on May 7, 2025, in Washington, D.C. () MORE: More than 25 protesters arrested after taking over University of Washington building The hearing was the committee's ninth congressional event dedicated to antisemitism since Oct. 7. Despite more than a year of oversight, Chairman Tim Walberg, R-Mich., said universities continue to be infested with antisemitism. Walberg slammed the presidents testifying on Wednesday, especially Haverford College, saying, "The Haverford administration has consistently refused to act against severe antisemitic harassment on campus. It has refused to even condemn these incidents of harassment or hostility in a clear, unequivocal statement, much less to meaningfully discipline the students responsible for these incidents." However, the liberal arts school has taken steps to address antisemitism in all its forms, argued Raymond, who repeatedly denounced hate speech on her campus. "I hear you and acknowledge that we can do better and I can do better," Raymond said. "To our Jewish students, some of you who are here today, I wish to make it unmistakably clear that you are valued members of our community and on our campus. I am sorry that my actions and my leadership let you down. I remain committed to addressing antisemitism and all issues that harm our community members. I am committed to getting this right," Raymond added. McClain blasted the "hollow" apologies. "Why did it take them this long to apologize, No. 1, and why did it take them this long to change their policies?" McClain told ABC News. "If they were truly sorry, it should have happened long, long ago." She warned colleges and universities that fostering antisemitism on campus could lead to monetary consequences, including the loss of federal funding. "The only thing that these universities respect is the dollar," McClain said. "I know it shouldn't be like that, but that gets their attention." PHOTO: Rep. Elise Stefanik speaks during a hearing before the House Education and Workforce Committee at the Rayburn House Office Building, on May 7, 2025, in Washington, D.C. () MORE: Department of Education lays off nearly 50% of its workforce Meanwhile, Democrats claimed the dismantling of the Department of Education's civil rights divisions, which conducts investigations on the issues the committee is bringing up in its hearings, runs counter to Republicans' work to eliminate antisemitism on college campuses. "We have in place systems to hold universities who receive federal money -- to hold them accountable for discrimination that occurs on the basis of religion," said Rep. Mark Takano, D-Calif., who later stormed out of the hearing during Stefanik's questioning. Ranking member Bobby Scott, D-Va., said the department has a backlog of 12,000 open civil rights cases but that the agency has slashed half its staff and shuttered regional civil rights offices across the country. "One is left to wonder how can OCR carry out its important responsibilities with half the staff?" Scott asked. Jewish Rep. Suzanne Bonamici, D-Ore., said she can no longer pretend the antisemitism crusade is a "good faith" effort by her Republican colleagues on the committee. "Instead of engaging with this topic genuinely and constructively, we have another performative hearing," Bonamici said. "It's another chapter in the majority's battle against higher education." University presidents, Republican lawmakers spar over alleged antisemitism on campuses originally appeared on
07-05-2025
- Politics
University presidents, Republican lawmakers spar over alleged antisemitism on campuses
College presidents faced off with lawmakers on the House Education and Workforce Committee on Wednesday in an at-times contentious congressional hearing examining alleged antisemitism on campus. But the school leaders' concessions and inability to explain why they didn't follow university policies to remove encampment demonstrations fell short of satisfying Republicans.. When pressed by House Republican Conference Chairwoman Lisa McClain "How'd that go?" DePaul University President Robert Manuel responded, "Not very well." "Your apologies are a little hollow," McClain responded. The hearing, aimed at stopping the alleged spread of antisemitism at colleges and universities, featured the presidents of DePaul University, Haverford College and California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo. Dr. Jeffrey Armstrong of Cal Poly defended his school and its "vibrant" Jewish community. "We do not tolerate threatening activity," Armstrong said. "We deploy campus police whenever there is the potential for trouble, and they make arrests and file criminal charges when justified. In addition, when alleged antisemitism or harassment occurs, we investigate and impose immediate university discipline," he added. In an exchange with Haverford President Wendy Raymond, Rep. Elise Stefanik, R-N.Y., admonished Raymond for her university's lack of transparency in identifying the school's disciplinary actions. "For the American people watching, you still don't get it -- Haverford still doesn't get it," Stefanik said. "It's a very different testimony than the other presidents who are here today who are coming with specifics," she added. "So, again, this is completely unacceptable, and it's why this committee stepped in because higher education has failed to address the scourge of antisemitism, putting Jewish students a risk at Haverford and other campuses across the country." Stefanik has led the charge against antisemitic conduct and harassment on campuses since the Oct. 7 Hamas attack in Israel. Her question -- does calling for the genocide of Jews constitute as hate speech on campus? -- became the highlight of the Education and Workforce Committee's historic Dec. 5, 2023, hearing with the presidents of Harvard University, the University of Pennsylvania, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology on combating antisemitism. But the hearing, called "Beyond the Ivy League," is a stark contrast from those featuring the schools on which the committee had typically focused its ire. This time, the university presidents prepared for Stefanik's grilling. The congresswoman asked if calling for the genocide of Jews is "protected speech" on Haverford's campus. "No, of course not," Raymond replied. "And what disciplinary action has been taken or would be taken if someone made that call?" Stefanik interjected. "Representative, there have been no such calls, and we would use all of our disciplinary actions to follow through on any such call," Raymond said. "I would never expect that to happen at Haverford, and if it would, we would deal with that swiftly." McClain told ABC News after her questioning in the hearing that it isn't Congress' job to get any of the presidents fired but that she thinks it should be "considered." "All options are on the table," McClain said. "Actions speak louder than words, right?" McClain added. "There has to be consequences to one's actions. And that's what's not happening at these universities. It's lip service." All the presidents distanced themselves from the answers made in the Harvard hearing and apologized to their respective Jewish communities for their inaction. "To our students, our parents, our faculty, our staff, our alumni and our friends, I am deeply sorry," Manuel said. "I know there are areas where we must and will do better." Manuel also spoke directly to two of his students who were harassed on campus last fall, including Michael Kaminsky, a junior who was in attendance at the hearing on Wednesday and said at a news conference on Capitol Hill on Tuesday that he was injured during an assault for being a Jewish American. "What happened to them was a hate crime. No one should ever be attacked because of who they are. I am sorry for the pain they experienced," he said. The hearing was the committee's ninth congressional event dedicated to antisemitism since Oct. 7. Despite more than a year of oversight, Chairman Tim Walberg, R-Mich., said universities continue to be infested with antisemitism. Walberg slammed the presidents testifying on Wednesday, especially Haverford College, saying, "The Haverford administration has consistently refused to act against severe antisemitic harassment on campus. It has refused to even condemn these incidents of harassment or hostility in a clear, unequivocal statement, much less to meaningfully discipline the students responsible for these incidents." However, the liberal arts school has taken steps to address antisemitism in all its forms, argued Raymond, who repeatedly denounced hate speech on her campus. "I hear you and acknowledge that we can do better and I can do better," Raymond said. "To our Jewish students, some of you who are here today, I wish to make it unmistakably clear that you are valued members of our community and on our campus. I am sorry that my actions and my leadership let you down. I remain committed to addressing antisemitism and all issues that harm our community members. I am committed to getting this right," Raymond added. McClain blasted the "hollow" apologies. "Why did it take them this long to apologize, No. 1, and why did it take them this long to change their policies?" McClain told ABC News. "If they were truly sorry, it should have happened long, long ago." She warned colleges and universities that fostering antisemitism on campus could lead to monetary consequences, including the loss of federal funding. "The only thing that these universities respect is the dollar," McClain said. "I know it shouldn't be like that, but that gets their attention." Meanwhile, Democrats claimed the dismantling of the Department of Education's civil rights divisions, which conducts investigations on the issues the committee is bringing up in its hearings, runs counter to Republicans' work to eliminate antisemitism on college campuses. "We have in place systems to hold universities who receive federal money -- to hold them accountable for discrimination that occurs on the basis of religion," said Rep. Mark Takano, D-Calif., who later stormed out of the hearing during Stefanik's questioning. Ranking member Bobby Scott, D-Va., said the department has a backlog of 12,000 open civil rights cases but that the agency has slashed half its staff and shuttered regional civil rights offices across the country. "One is left to wonder how can OCR carry out its important responsibilities with half the staff?" Scott asked. Jewish Rep. Suzanne Bonamici, D-Ore., said she can no longer pretend the antisemitism crusade is a "good faith" effort by her Republican colleagues on the committee. "Instead of engaging with this topic genuinely and constructively, we have another performative hearing," Bonamici said. "It's another chapter in the majority's battle against higher education."
