WVU would have to operate ‘center for civics' overseen by political appointee, bill says
West Virginia University would be required to operate a civics learning center focused on teaching constitutional studies and 'great debates of Western civilization' overseen by a governor's appointee, according to a bill approved by the House of Delegates.
It would be called the Washington Center for Civics, Culture and Statesmanship.
'There can be pressure from such institutions on how to teach certain subjects,' said House Majority Leader Pat McGeehan, R-Hanock, on Friday as the House debated the bill. 'Academic freedom to these professors to teach how they want to to teach is very attractive today.'
The unfunded mandate comes in the wake of WVU's budget crunch that resulted in axing 28 academic majors and hundreds of jobs, including faculty members. The university also recently shuttered its Division of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion following Gov. Patrick Morrisey's ban on state funds for entities using the diversity initiatives.
The measure, House Bill 3297, drew concerns from House Democrats, who voiced concerns about the governor having the final say on who would oversee the center.
'I'm not big on government mandates and big government. You can check my voting record on that,' said Del. Shawn Fluharty, D-Ohio. 'This is setting up some cush position for the governor to appoint somebody. This is a beautiful handout for a bureaucrat.'
Del. John Williams D-Monongalia, said the university already offers dozens of courses across multiple majors that could accomplish the bill's goals regarding course offerings.
'By and large, my experience at this university, and I think the experience of other people, is one in which political science [and] philosophy professors don't tip their hand. It's hard to tell where they are politically as it should be because they're challenging our students,' said Williams, who graduated from WVU.
'I don't like that we're meddling, particularly with the political science department, where there are renowned, locally famous teachers … and now, we're going to come in and mess with their major and how they teach their students,' he said.
The bill doesn't come with funding to pay the center's director or any faculty members hired to teach its programs. The center's director could hire tenure-track faculty, which is different from the university's current faculty hiring process.
Del. Chris Phillips, R-Babour, told lawmakers during bill debate, 'I've been told the university supports this.'
WVU Communications Director April Kaull told West Virginia Watch that the university does not have an official position on the legislation.
'We believe civics education and statesmanship are important values to our state and nation. Many of our existing programs, especially in the WVU Eberly College of Arts and Sciences, focus on these areas,' Kaull said. 'We have shared our concerns about the funding needed to operate this center and how its ability to offer degrees and award tenure would conform to our accreditation standards and policies.'
While McGeehan said that funding could be allocated later, Williams worried about who might want to fund the school if the state doesn't. 'Who will want to pay to have a say in how we educate the next generation?' he asked.
The bill now goes to the Senate for consideration.
The legislation was modeled after legislation in several other states, according to McGeehan.
'It's designed to attract very talented professors with a very narrow focus, mainly in the humanities,' he said. 'Then, to attract STEM students into taking some kind of minor or at least have a background in some of these subject areas that they otherwise wouldn't take.'
McGeehan was recently involved in a controversial move by the West Virginia Water Development Authority to give $5 million to an Ohio-based Catholic-affiliated career and vocational college to create a right-wing think tank. The Parkersburg News and Sentinel reported that McGeehan helped the College of St. Joseph the Worker with their application for WDA funds.
The WDA made the decision without a required recommendation from one of three state officials.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
21 minutes ago
Republican budget bill dismantles climate law passed by Democrats
WASHINGTON -- The sprawling Republican budget bill approved by the Senate Tuesday removes a proposed tax on solar and wind energy projects but quickly phases out tax credits for wind, solar and other renewable energy. The Senate approved the bill 51-50 as President Donald Trump and GOP lawmakers move to dismantle the 2022 climate law passed by Democrats under former President Joe Biden. Vice President JD Vance broke a tie after three Republican senators voted no. The bill now moves to the House for final legislative approval. The excise tax on solar and wind generation projects was added to the Senate bill over the weekend, prompting bipartisan pushback from lawmakers as well as clean energy developers and advocates. The final bill removes the tax but mostly sticks with legislative language released late Friday night and would end incentives for clean energy sooner than a draft version unveiled two weeks ago. Democrats and environmental groups said the GOP plan would crush growth in the wind and solar industry and lead to a spike in Americans' utility bills. The measure jeopardizes hundreds of renewable energy projects slated to boost the nation's electric grid, they said. 'Despite limited improvements, this legislation undermines the very foundation of America's manufacturing comeback and global energy leadership,' said Abigail Ross Hopper, president and CEO of the Solar Energy Industries Association. If the bill becomes law, 'families will face higher electric bills, factories will shut down, Americans will lose their jobs, and our electric grid will grow weaker,'' she said. The American Petroleum Institute, the top lobbying group for the oil and gas industry, applauded the bill's passage. 'This historic legislation will help usher in a new era of energy dominance by unlocking opportunities for investment, opening lease sales and expanding access to oil and natural gas development,'' said Mike Sommers, the group's president and CEO. While Democrats complained that the bill would make it harder to get renewable energy to the electric grid, Republicans said the measure represents historic savings for taxpayers and supports production of traditional energy sources such as oil, natural gas and coal, as well as nuclear power, increasing reliability. In a compromise approved overnight, the bill allows wind and solar projects that begin construction within a year of the law's enactment to get a full tax credit without a deadline for when the projects are 'placed in service,'' or plugged into the grid. Wind and solar projects that begin later must be placed in service by the end of 2027 to get a credit. The bill retains incentives for technologies such as advanced nuclear, geothermal and hydropower through 2032. Changes to the renewable energy language — including removal of the excise tax on wind and solar — were negotiated by a group of Republican senators, including Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski and Iowa Sens. Joni Ernst and Chuck Grassley. Iowa is a top producer of wind power, while Murkowski is a longtime supporter of renewable energy as crucial for achieving energy independence, particularly for isolated rural communities in Alaska. Murkowski, who voted in favor of the final bill, called her decision-making process 'agonizing.' Changes that push back the timeline for terminating wind and solar credits mean that 'a good number' of Alaska projects would still qualify, she said. 'Again, it's not all we wanted. It could have been worse,' she told reporters Tuesday. Murkowski praised provisions calling for more oil lease sales in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and other areas in Alaska and increased revenue sharing. Rhode Island Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, the top Democrat on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, called the bill a 'massively destructive piece of legislation' that 'increases costs for everyone by walloping the health care system, making families go hungry and sending utility bills through the roof.' The bill 'saddles our children and grandchildren with trillions and trillions of dollars in debt — all to serve giant corporations, fossil fuel polluters and billionaire Republican megadonors who are already among the richest people on the planet,' Whitehouse said. Wyoming Sen. John Barrasso, the No. 2 Senate Republican, hailed the bill for rescinding many elements of what he called the Biden administration's 'green new scam,' including electric vehicle tax credits that have allowed car owners to lower the purchase price of EVs by $7,500. The bill also blocks for 10 years a first-ever fee on excess methane emissions from oil and gas production. Industry groups fiercely opposed the methane fee, which was authorized by Democrats in the 2022 climate law but never implemented. The GOP bill also increases oil and gas leases on public lands and revives coal leasing in Wyoming and other states. 'Today, the Senate moved President Trump's agenda forward,'' said West Virginia Sen. Shelley Moore Capito, a Republican who chairs the Senate environment committee. Clean energy advocates were deeply disappointed by the bill, which they argue undoes much of the climate law before it fully takes effect. 'By eliminating a number of clean energy incentives and slashing others, this bill represents a significant step backward for America's energy future,' said Nathaniel Keohane, president of the Center for Climate and Energy Solutions, a nonprofit that seeks to accelerate the global transition to net-zero greenhouse gas emissions. 'Curtailing incentives for electricity generated from wind and solar power is particularly shortsighted'' and will raise energy prices for households and businesses and threaten reliability of the electric grid, Keohane said.
Washington Post
27 minutes ago
- Washington Post
National pride in the U.S. sees dramatic decline, Gallup survey finds
Just 58 percent of adults in the United States are 'extremely' or 'very' proud to be American, according to a Gallup poll released this week — the lowest level recorded by the company in the more than two decades since it started including the question in surveys. The dramatic decline was largely driven by Democrats, while most Republicans had strong feelings of national pride, according to the poll published Monday — an indicator of the deepening partisan divide in the U.S. Younger Americans, particularly Gen Z, are also less likely to be proud of their country compared with previous generations.
41 minutes ago
Trump says the GOP mega bill will eliminate taxes on Social Security. It does not.
WASHINGTON -- President Donald Trump keeps saying that Republicans' mega tax and spending cut legislation will eliminate taxes on federal Social Security benefits. It does not. At best, Trump's 'no tax on Social Security' claim exaggerates the benefits to seniors if either the House or Senate-passed proposals is signed into law. Here's a look at Trump's recent statements, and what the proposals would — or would not — do. Trump repeatedly told voters during his 2024 campaign that he would eliminate taxes on Social Security. As his massive legislative package has moved through Congress, the Republican president has claimed that's what the bill would do. Trump said on a recent appearance on Fox News' 'Sunday Morning Futures" that the bill includes 'no tax on tips, no tax on Social Security, no tax on overtime.' But instead of eliminating the tax, the Senate and House have each passed their own versions of a temporary tax deduction for seniors aged 65 and over, which applies to all income — not just Social Security. And it turns out not all Social Security beneficiaries will be able to claim the deduction. Those who won't be able to do so include the lowest-income seniors who already don't pay taxes on Social Security, those who choose to claim their benefits before they reach age 65 and those above a defined income threshold. The Senate proposal includes a temporary $6,000 deduction for seniors over the age of 65, contrasted with the House proposal, which includes a temporary deduction of $4,000. The Senate proposal approved Tuesday would eliminate Social Security tax liability for seniors with adjusted gross incomes of $75,000 or less or $150,000 if filing as a married couple. If passed into law, the tax deduction would last four years, from 2025 to 2029. The deductions phase out as income increases. Touting a new Council of Economic Advisers analysis, the White House said Tuesday that '88% of all seniors who receive Social Security — will pay NO TAX on their Social Security benefits," going on to say that the Senate proposal's $6,000 senior deduction 'is estimated to benefit 33.9 million seniors, including seniors not claiming Social Security. The deduction yields an average increase in after-tax income of $670 per senior who benefits from it.' Garrett Watson, director of policy analysis at the Tax Foundation think tank, said conflating the tax deduction with a claim that there will be no tax on Social Security could end up confusing and angering a lot of seniors who will expect to not pay taxes on their Social Security benefits. 'While the deduction does provide some relief for seniors, it's far from completely repealing the tax on their benefits,' Watson said. The cost of actually eliminating the tax on Social Security would have massive impacts on the economy. University of Pennsylvania's Penn Wharton Budget Model estimates that eliminating income taxes on Social Security benefits 'would reduce revenues by $1.5 trillion over 10 years and increase federal debt by 7 percent by 2054" and speed up the projected depletion date of the Social Security Trust Fund from 2034 to 2032. Discussions over taxes on Social Security are just part of the overall bill, which is estimated in its Senate version to increase federal deficits over the next 10 years by nearly $3.3 trillion from 2025 to 2034, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Administration officials have said the cost of the tax bill would be offset by tariff income. Recently, the CBO separately estimated that Trump's sweeping tariff plan would cut deficits by $2.8 trillion over a 10-year period while shrinking the economy, raising the inflation rate and reducing the purchasing power of households overall.
