“It’s a cure that’s worse than the disease,” said Professor of History Reed Browning, referring to a recent proposal by Ohio Senator Larry Mumper (R-Marion) to codify an “academic bill of rights” in response to many conservatives’ criticism of systemic bias in higher education.

Senate Bill 24 (SB 24), as it is known, would mandate “a learning environment in which the students have access to a broad range of serious scholarly opinion pertaining to the subjects they study.” In addition, the bill requires nondiscrimination against students and professors seeking tenure based upon their political views.

However, the most controversial part, which headlined a Jan. 28 Columbus Dispatch article on the proposed law, is a prohibition of “persistently introducing controversial matter into the classroom.”

Grace Murray ’05, co-editor of The Kenyon Voice, a left-leaning political digest on campus, called SB 24 “a waste of time.” Murray also said, “If students wanted a bill of rights they would write one and lobby to have it made into law,” adding, “I do not see this happening.” In addition, Murray questioned how one would decide exactly what “controversial” material is.

Daniel Epstein ’05, editor of The Kenyon Observer, a conservative publication, said that while he is concerned with the problem of bias in the classroom, he does not believe that legislation is needed to “enforce intellectual freedom.”

Members of the Kenyon Republicans and the Kenyon Democrats did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Bias in academia has been a cause célèbre for many conservatives for some time. The foremost critic of academia is the conservative commentator David Horowitz, whose “Academic Bill of Rights” is the basis of SB 24. Horowitz celebrated the introduction of SB 24. His website, FrontPageMag.com, headlined a story on it “Indoctrination Meets Its Match in Ohio.”

However, many Kenyon professors feel a legislative remedy is not needed. Peter Rutkoff, Professor of American Studies, said that the bill “feels like McCarthyism” to him.

Religion Professor Vernon Schubel sees questions as to how pluralistic education under the new system would have to be. He wondered that, with such a law, if American history professors would have to teach “the ‘pro-slavery position,” or if he would have teach the views of people who think non-Christian religions are Satanic in his Introduction to Religion course.

Browning and Professor of Political Science Fred Baumann both self-described conservatives, also feel the law is unnecessary and potentially harmful. Browning said his opposition comes from a natural distrust of regulation by legislation. He also said that he feels such legislation would open the door to litigation and cause professors to worry about another type of discrimination.

In April of last year, Browning wrote an article in The Chronicle of Higher Education, describing the problem of bias in the academy. He said bias is primarily the result of a low number of conservative students seeking employment in university teaching, saying “after four years of classroom sparring with liberal faculty members [conservative students often feel] that the integrity of [their studies are] suspect.”

Conservative websites, such as Horowitz’s, have documented multiple instances of professor’s biases translating into discrimination against students. A common topic is assigning students to write papers criticizing President Bush, while refusing to give credit to papers supporting the president.

Discrimination against conservative students was one of the reasons for SB 24’s proposal, according to Senator Mumper. “[Conservative students] need to have their rights defended and need to be respected by faculty and administrators” of whom “80 percent of so…are Democrats, liberals, or socialists, or card-carrying Communists,” said Mumper.

On a local level, Browning said that he does not think such ideological discrimination has widely occurred in his nearly 38 years at Kenyon, during some of which he served as Provost.

Schubel said, “My fear [with the bill] is that the legislation is designed to prevent academics from having a position, not to protect students from being penalized for holding a different one.”

Another problem Mumper feels needs to be addressed is the “indoctrination” of young college students, many of whom “haven’t had a chance to form their own opinions.”

Rutkoff dismissed this idea, saying that he has “more faith in [students than] to worry about indoctrination.” Browning said that, although he can understand some people worrying about their children adopting alien views to those under which they were raised, he said that it is not a major issue in colleges, and not one he worried about when he sent his son to college. Baumann said that he does not see the truth in the charge, saying that students learn to tell professors what the professors want to hear, but as life goes on, their views continue to change and mature.

What both Browning and Baumann see as most deleterious about academic bias, however, is the lack of true discussion that they see as the hallmark of a liberal education.

Baumann said that in order to get a true liberal arts education, student need to get both sides of an issue, something that is lacking when professors all believe the same thing. Browning noted that at many colleges, it is often difficult to assemble panels featuring professors who support the war in Iraq, who do not support abortion, or who are in favor of lower taxes. As a result, Browning said, many faculty members never find themselves facing the sorts of challenges for which the entered academia.

However, Baumann and Browning both echoed that such problems are not nearly as bad at Kenyon. Baumann said, “Kenyon is a place with a certain degree of intellectual diversity.” Browning concurred, saying that while the faculty (and student body, as well) is mostly liberal, there are a number of outspoken conservatives among its ranks.

Empirical evidence from the recent election supports at least Browning’s first claim. In the Gambier precinct, where many faculty members and students voted, over ninety percent of votes cast were for Democrat John Kerry. A search on the Web site fundrace.org showed that in the recent election cycle, current and retired faculty and staff living in the Gambier and Mount Vernon ZIP codes gave $8,343 to Democratic presidential candidates and the Democratic party, while only $300 was given to the Republican party. Both Baumann and Browning noted that the split seems to be greater now than in previous years.

Despite such an imbalance, Baumann noted that when he talks to Kenyon’s top applicants, who are no doubt also considering other more “prestigious” schools, he frequently finds that how Kenyon is set apart is that “we still argue here.”

In the end, Rutkoff said, “Let the ideas flow, like a thousand flowers.”

This “wide openness,” according to Browning, is “something wonderful about Kenyon.”