Originally posted on IdahoEdNews.org on March 25, 2025

BOISE, ID – A sharply divided budget committee pushed ahead with a plan for cuts at Boise State University and the University of Idaho.

The budget cuts — $2 million a year, ongoing, at Boise State and U of I — appear in a higher ed spending bill that would have to pass both houses. If Tuesday morning’s Joint Finance-Appropriations Committee meeting is any indication, the Legislature itself could be deeply split — with some lawmakers seeing the cuts as a message on DEI and campus politics, and other lawmakers seeing them as punitive.

“It saddens me to see the direction our universities have taken,” said Rep. Josh Tanner, R-Eagle, who argued that higher education, nationally and locally, has embraced “the wrong ideology for America.”

Lobbyists for the U of I and Boise State attended Tuesday morning’s JFAC hearing, but afterward, they had no immediate comment on the proposed cuts.

The JFAC discussions, and the debate over the budget cuts, echoed many of the higher ed debates that have unfolded in the Statehouse over the past several years.

Tanner directed a couple of grievances at the U of I. He said the U of I was slow to close student support centers, waiting until the State Board of Education passed a resolution restricting diversity, equity and inclusion programs. He also criticized the U of I for continuing to pursue a purchase of the University of Phoenix, even as lawmakers opposed the $685 million bid. “They thought they just knew best.”

Rep. Wendy Horman, the budget committee’s House co-chair, said the Legislature needs to move a far-reaching anti-DEI policy bill that has been stalled for nearly two months in the Senate State Affairs Committee. The Legislature has banned the universities from using state tax dollars on DEI, “(but) clearly, that’s still been happening on the campuses,” said Horman, R-Idaho Falls.

Sen. Melissa Wintrow defended the universities. Wintrow, of Boise, was the lone Democrat who sat on a House-Senate task force that endorsed the anti-DEI policy bill. During that process, she said, the universities produced reports that showed they spent no state tax dollars on DEI programs. “They were given the law and they followed the law,” she said.

Sen. Codi Galloway, R-Boise, said the universities have made a “course change” over the past four years, moving closer in line with Idaho values. Cutting the budgets now would undermine the Legislature’s bargaining stance.

“The money is small,” said Galloway, who led a failed attempt to head off the $4 million in cuts. “The message we send is big.”

Ultimately, the debate boiled down to politics — and trying to get a higher ed budget bill through the House and Senate before the end of the 2025 session. Horman said the $4 million in cuts are an attempt to satisfy House members “(who) were looking for much more significant cuts earlier in the session.”

At one point, Sen. Kevin Cook, R-Idaho Falls, asked if the cuts were simply punitive.

“You can use that word if you like,” Horman said. “I’m using the word pragmatic.”

That political calculus could be put to the test quickly.

The budget bill — including the $4 million in cuts — got out of JFAC on a split vote. Eight of the 10 House committee members voted for it. But only five of the committee’s 10 senators supported it. Under JFAC’s convoluted rules, the budget bill will go to the Senate — and its prospects on the floor would appear to be iffy.

Despite the budget cuts, this higher ed spending bill would still provide a $3.2 million net increase for the four-year schools. The line items:

• Nearly $3.4 million for “operational capacity enhancement,” discretionary dollars the four-year schools can spend on salaries and benefits.
• Slightly more than $1 million for “enrollment workload adjustment,” which provides extra funding based on growth.
• An even $1 million for the Idaho Water Resources Research Institute, a systemwide project.
• Nearly $400,000 for pay raises at Lewis-Clark State College.

This budget bill, in JFAC parlance, is known as an “enhancement” spending plan. It’s an add-on to a higher ed base budget totaling more than $736 million.

The higher ed budget ‘intent language’

The Joint Finance-Appropriations Committeee didn’t just debate about higher ed numbers Tuesday.

The budget-writers also haggled over legislative directives — “intent language,” in the lexicon of the Statehouse.

Here are three clauses that passed, and one that didn’t.

ICOM. The higher ed budget bill sets some groundrules for the possible purchase of the Idaho College of Osteopathic Medicine, a for-profit medical school in Meridian.

Idaho State University, already closely aligned with ICOM, would be in charge of brokering a purchase. But Idaho State and the State Board of Education would be responsible for turning in “current or historical financial data, operational data, correspondences, draft agreements and briefing materials” to legislative staff.

And in a clear reference to the University of Idaho’s closed-door talks with the University of Phoenix, no one involved in an ICOM purchase would be allowed to sign a non-disclosure agreement.

Outcomes-based funding. The State Board would be required to come up with a written plan for an outcomes-based funding model. This would be due on Dec. 31, and would go into effect by 2027-28. This model would replace the enrollment workload adjustment funding, now divvied up through an arcane formula.

A DEI audit. Legislative staff would audit the four-year schools — at the schools’ expense — to make sure they are complying with state bans on diversity, equity and inclusion. That report would be due Dec. 1.

Sen. Melissa Wintrow, D-Boise, said the audits were unnecessary, since the reports to a legislative DEI task force gave the four-year schools a clean bill of health.

If that’s indeed the case, said a JFAC co-chair, Rep. Wendy Horman, R-Idaho Falls, “this (intent) language will confirm that.”

This language passed on a 17-3 vote.

A Phoenix funding clawback. Rep. Josh Tanner wanted to force the U of I to give up any money it recoups from the Phoenix negotiations, folding it into the state’s general fund.

“U of I took a bold step outside the Legislature,” said Tanner, R-Eagle. “They don’t get to have every bit of say just because you’re the land-grant institution … no matter how many attorneys you hire.”

The U of I has already received $5 million from Phoenix — and could receive a total of $20 million in “breakup fees” if the Phoenix purchase doesn’t go through. The U of I says it is using this money to cover its Phoenix-related consulting costs, which exceed $14 million.

Sen. Jim Woodward, R-Sagle, said the language set a dangerous precedent, opening the door for the Legislature to try to claw back alumni donations and other higher ed funding.

“I think we’re way out of line on this one.”

The motion failed, 5-15.