by AAUP National
March 4, 2021
Three proposals currently under consideration by the Iowa Legislature raise troubling concerns about academic freedom and freedom of speech on campus. One bill would end tenure for professors at the state's three public universities. Tenure provides that after a suitable probationary period a faculty member may be dismissed only for just cause and only after a due process hearing before a suitable body of qualified peers. As such it has long been widely recognized as the strongest and most important protection for academic freedom. As the Iowa Board of Regents points out, tenure also allows universities “to recruit and retain the best faculty to teach, do research and provide service.”
A second proposal would mandate surveys of university employees’ political affiliations, ostensibly in search of greater ideological “balance.” The dangers posed by such a move to both personal privacy and to freedom of association and belief should be obvious. The idea that the composition of the faculty must somehow reflect the distribution of political affiliation among the citizenry fails to recognize that the whole point of academic freedom is to insulate professional judgment from political control. As the Iowa ACLU pointed out, “The government just shouldn't be in the business of asking its employees what their political beliefs are, who they voted for.”
We are encouraged by reports that these proposals may face a difficult path to passage. However, a third proposal, ostensibly intended to guarantee freedom of speech on campus, may, we understand, be more likely to gain approval, albeit perhaps in a compromise version. As the AAUP has previously noted, such “campus free speech” bills are largely solutions in search of a problem. Fear that the free exchange of ideas no longer occurs on campuses is grossly exaggerated. The AAUP has long held that freedom of thought and expression is essential to any institution of higher learning. We believe that on a campus that is free and open, no idea should be banned or forbidden. A genuine rise in campus censorship of ideas would therefore be cause for great concern. What we are seeing, however, are most often difficult situations in a polarized political environment in which, for the most part, campuses are doing well at protecting the rights of both speakers and protesters. As the AAUP's Committee on Government Relations reported in a survey of similar proposals, “Many of the most difficult issues surrounding free speech at present are about balancing unobstructed dialogue with the need to make all constituencies on campus feel included. This can, at times, be a tricky undertaking. But punitive and simplistic measures advocated by proponents of many campus free-speech bills make finding an adequate solution more difficult, not less.”