Ohio House Committee Votes To Pass Controversial Bill

The Ohio House Higher Education Committee has voted to pass a massive and controversial bill to overhaul higher education in the state.  

Wednesday morning, they voted 8-7 to pass the Ohio Higher Education Enhancement Act, also known as Senate Bill 83.

The bill includes a wide range of proposals. It would change how university faculty are hired and fired, ban mandatory diversity training, and not allow a university to take a stance on social issues, among others.

The bill will head to the Ohio House where its future is uncertain after House Speaker Jason Stephens (R-Kitts Hill) said in late November that the bill “doesn’t have the votes” to pass.

After news of the house committee’s vote to pass broke, the Ohio Student Association issued the following statement:

“Certain politicians have claimed that SB 83 was written with the interests of students in mind, but since students have made it clear that this bill is in direct opposition to their interests and lawmakers are still moving it forward, that claim rings hollow.”

They are not the only opponents to the bill. So is Deb Smith, a Kent State professor and President of the Kent State Chapter of the American Association of University Professors. 

The union represents around 1,300 Kent State faculty, both tenured and non-tenured.

Union members, Smith said, are not in support of the bill.

“I have not heard from a single faculty member that is upset that the union is opposing SB 83,” she said in an interview prior to the House Committee vote. 

Several faculty, including Smith, have testified in opposition of the bill, both in-person and by submitting written testimony. 

They’re concerned about academic freedom and what they’d be allowed to teach students. 

“It’s created a level of stress and anxiety for faculty because [they’re] sort of constantly worried,” she said.

Some have considered leaving the state, she said, which adds to her concerns about recruitment and retention of faculty. 

Supporters of the bill say it’s necessary to future-proof Ohio’s higher education system. 

“In this day and age, higher ed is facing issues that they’ve never had to before,” said Rep. Tom Young (R) who is the chair of the Ohio House Higher Education Committee. He voted to pass the bill at the committee’s Wednesday hearing. 

Those issues, Young said, are lower enrollment and competition from online technical programs. 

“The only thing you can do with change, because it’s inevitable, is surrender to it and then work for a better way,” he said. 

On the issue of prohibiting mandatory DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion) programs – Young said it comes down to personal freedom.

“Everybody has the right to say ‘no’. And to force feed or to force people to do something that they don’t believe is true and is not applicable to them is unacceptable,” he said. 

In a March interview with TV2, Sen. Jerry Cirino, who sponsored the bill, said universities “should not be taking positions” on certain subjects. 

“The university should be discussing those subjects and helping students figure out how to analyze, review, [and] research to come to their own conclusions,” he said. 

Another of Young’s concerns is potential intimidation in the classroom when certain topics are discussed.

He said he’s met with students and professors who don’t share their beliefs for fear of retaliation. 

“That’s the frightening part,” he said. 

Some incidents, he said, were recorded on video and shown to him.

He said he’s “stunned” that this is happening. 

“Even though you will get pushback from this remark, it is the absolute truth. And no one’s going to change my mind on this,” he said. 

The fight to make Senate Bill 83 law isn’t over. Young said “no one’s giving up” on the bill and additional legislation is coming in 2024. 

“There are many bills coming that no one’s seen so far in primary legislation. And there will be more and more and more and more,” he said.

The uncertainty of what’s to come is concerning for Smith, who said her union will remain “vigilant” as they monitor developments from the statehouse. 

“I hope that students realize that when the academic freedom of faculty is threatened, it’s really the student’s education that is harmed,” she said.