[Congressional Record Volume 167, Number 216 (Wednesday, December 15, 2021)]
[Senate]
[Page S9178]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                           Campus Free Speech

  Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, many times my fellow Senators have heard 
me say that my definition of a university is a place where controversy 
ought to run rampant. The point of going to college is not for all 
students to come out thinking exactly the same way. College is for 
ideas to be challenged. To weed out ideas we disagree with, we need 
open debate, not to shut down the conversation. Students of all stripes 
should be able to say what is on their mind.
  Institutional free speech should not be partisan. You can have 
partisan discussions, but the merely speaking of it, right or wrong, 
you agree or disagree, should not be a partisan issue or even be a 
controversial issue. Everyone is hurt if ideas are not frankly 
discussed by the next generation.
  Thankfully, Iowa has recognized this reality. So this spring, 
Governor Reynolds signed a bill into law that helps codify free 
expression in Iowa's public colleges.
  Now, it sometimes feels like Washington, DC, can forget common sense 
on this issue as well as a lot of other issues. But in Des Moines, the 
bill passed both chambers of the Iowa Legislature with just 1 single 
``no'' vote out of 150 senators and representatives.
  But here we are nationally. We seem to be heading in the wrong 
direction in regard to free speech on campus and discussion of some 
controversial issues. As recent as 2016, majorities of students were 
confident that the First Amendment was secure, but now it looks like 
there has been a chilling effect on too many campuses.
  According to a more recent poll, 80 percent of the students now say 
that they self-censor. In other words, 80 percent of the students are 
afraid to voice and give their support or opposition on certain issues. 
Hostility to freedom of expression is being heard loud and clear by our 
students.
  But somehow it doesn't seem like the donors seem to be listening to 
what is happening on these college campuses. I have tried to highlight 
this overlooked group of donors in the free speech debate. Students and 
faculty are limited by the threat of getting canceled on campus. But 
donors have much more sway if they want to take advantage of it.
  Now, it seems, unfortunately, these alumnae don't seem to consider 
free speech when they make a decision to donate, because their donation 
would have some power behind it if they would take the time to say what 
they think about how universities ought to be an environment where 
controversy runs rampant.
  We have a poll of donors to one college that found that the vast 
majority thought that freedom of expression should be a priority on 
campus, but only 20 percent said it was clear their alma mater protects 
speech in practice. Now, this is among donors, those who have already 
given despite their concerns. That is despite donations representing up 
to 19 percent of college budgets.
  There are more examples than I can count of donors withholding 
contributions and making real concrete change. Donors have stopped 
speakers from being deplatformed and overrode the veto of the crowd.
  It is time to stop pretending that alumni have no say. Earlier this 
year, I joined the Campus Free Speech Caucus here in the Congress. That 
caucus tries to preserve this trend. I am also a cosponsor of the 
Campus Free Speech Resolution, which urges greater First Amendment 
protection in America's universities.
  But this is not a problem that can be solved by any bill in the 
Senate. Thankfully, that tide is starting to turn. One of the first 
colleges to make a move was the University of Chicago. In 2015, the 
university president sent a statement on free expression to the 
incoming freshmen. He showed in that letter how both sides of the aisle 
are hurt when campuses clamp down on open debate. He called out what 
are considered ``trigger warnings'' and ``safe spaces'' while praising 
academic freedom.
  Now other colleges in our country are slowly starting to follow suit. 
So far, 75 schools have released similar statements, but, of course, 75 
schools is only a fraction of all the colleges in the United States.
  To continue this progress we need individual Americans to make their 
voices heard. Ultimately, being a democracy means that we are able to 
listen to each other and do it civilly. We ought to be able to 
respectfully talk about where we agree and disagree, not sweep those 
disagreements under the rug and, in the process, silence those who do 
have the guts to speak out.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. BLUNT. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Rosen). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.