Iowa regents rolled over on DEI, so university presidents must resist 'anti-woke' attacks

The board running Iowa’s public universities decided their diversity, equity and inclusion, or DEI, programs were bad and wasn’t about to let any facts change that.

It’s hard to draw another conclusion after reading a Board of Regents task force report and especially after regents discussed and then approved recommendations Nov. 16 to slash programming and (probably) jobs.

Republican legislators made obvious this spring that they view DEI as a tool of social division and radical-left, "woke" indoctrination that stifles speech and gives out unfair advantages. The Board of Regents can take a hint and set up a study of DEI. Lawmakers formally ordered one, too, for good measure. That the task force landed on gutting DEI is not a surprise. But the regents didn’t bother to justify their move, not even by pretense.

It will take months for changes to play out ― the three universities are now supposed to get started interpreting and implementing their overseers’ recommendations. In that time, the university presidents should demonstrate some spine that the regents apparently lack and work to preserve, not dismantle, their existing DEI infrastructure.

Rep. Taylor Collins, the Mediapolis Republican whose anti-DEI bill helped set this waste of time in motion, posted on X (formerly Twitter) after the task force report was published: “Iowa will no longer bend the knee to the DEI CRT agenda being pushed at our public universities.” But if there’s truly evidence of an insidious critical race theory agenda, the regents sure didn’t bother to mention it publicly. Instead, they praised the universities' DEI programs while approving steps that undercut or outright demolish them.

"We are formalizing a practice that the universities have already been doing," said Regent Greta Rouse.

Regent David Barker: "I learned from this review that our universities are welcoming places."

Regent Jim Lindenmayer said that support services that are part of the DEI programs have helped to boost retention and graduation rates for various groups. Occasional problems have generally been resolved, regents said.

Don't do anything unless you're forced to, regents direct

The lead direction the regents issued is to "restructure the central, university-wide DEI offices to eliminate any DEI functions that are not necessary for compliance or accreditation."

Even if this were a good idea, it would be a dispiriting way of putting it. “We don’t have the courage of our convictions to actually wipe out DEI and accept any funding and litigation consequences, so we'll hide behind this unambitious standard.”

The idea is actually quite wrong-headed, of course. The other recommendations range from superfluous — codify things the universities are already doing — to ironic — launch a DEI-like effort to attract conservative-leaning faculty. The report looks with suspicion on any initiative that’s marketed to specific demographics.

More: Editorial: Don't blow up diversity efforts at Iowa’s public universities

It’s well and good to be sure that support services are available to all students, including those who don’t fit into diversity groupings. But if the regents really believe any form of specific outreach or assistance is inherently suspect, where does that end? Will all 31,000 University of Iowa students be allowed to walk into the Gerdin Athletic Learning Center for tutoring and other support? Is the geographic preference in Iowa State’s Hixson scholarship program, which helps one student annually from each Iowa county, inclusion run amok?

Report spends little time on the most valid DEI criticisms

That's not to say that all DEI programs are beneficial or cost-effective. An appendix to the report shows 61 people employed in various UI departments working on DEI and earning $5.4 million in salaries alone; it's 56 people making well over $4 million at ISU.

Legislators or the regents might well be justified in sending a message about administrative bloat. But if that was their motivation, they could say so directly, and the Legislature for many years now has been making the point with its lackluster financial support for higher education.

DEI at its purest exists to push back on the tendency of “in” groups to resist and reject people who are different. It accomplishes this by educating everyone about people’s backgrounds and perspectives, by questioning whether supposed meritocracies are truly free of bias, and by identifying and remedying obstacles to equal opportunity.

This endeavor can and does produce excesses, such as conditioning employment on workers' affirmation of ideological statements. DEI can and has been associated with efforts to “cancel” people with different opinions. Indeed, the University of Iowa has infringed on conservative-leaning students' First Amendment rights more than once, and courts have been correct to smack down such muzzling.

But, again, the regents found no other pattern of such problems in Iowa, yet they chose to throw the baby out with the bath water.

The regents' DEI task force surveyed students, faculty and the public about their views on the programs. The results reflect a mess of self-selection, but they certainly lend no support to the regents’ actions. Over 80% call existing DEI efforts important.

It’s still true that rural Iowa is mostly white and Christian, which suggests that many college students are essentially experiencing a diverse environment for the first time. Understanding other cultures and perspectives will only become more important as Iowa’s demographics steadily become less homogenous.

The university presidents need to stand up for DEI

Two of the nine regents voted against some of the recommendations, arguing that students' wishes were being pushed aside and that Florida's and Texas' DEI strategies, which the recommendations reference explicitly, shouldn't be presumed wise.

"What happened to our peer groups at each of our universities?" asked Regent Nancy Dunkel, a former Democratic state lawmaker. Dunkel also said some of the direction amounted to "micromanaging."

Will the report satisfy DEI critics in the Legislature? Responding to an emailed interview request, Collins wrote, "I don’t participate in biased opinion pieces." He told a Register reporter he wants to wait to see how the regents' directions are implemented.

Since the regents wouldn't, it's up to the schools to find the resolve to resist the mischaracterization of DEI. Presidents Barbara Wilson at Iowa, Wendy Wintersteen at Iowa State and Mark Nook at Northern Iowa can insist on interpreting "not necessary for compliance and accreditation" as narrowly as possible.

The presidents can assert the value of thinking critically about biases and obstacles and opportunity. And they can stand up for members of disadvantaged groups, for their student bodies as a whole, for the state's businesses, and for their own employees — the ones whose work the regents couldn’t find fault with.

— Lucas Grundmeier, on behalf of the Register's editorial board

This editorial is the opinion of the Des Moines Register's editorial board: Carol Hunter, executive editor; Lucas Grundmeier, opinion editor; and Richard Doak and Rox Laird, editorial board members.

Want more opinions? Read other perspectives with our free newsletter, follow us on Facebook or visit us at DesMoinesRegister.com/opinion. Respond to any opinion by submitting a Letter to the Editor at DesMoinesRegister.com/letters.

This article originally appeared on Des Moines Register: DEI is worthwhile, and Iowa universities should preserve it