Your Cart is Empty
Contributions by current Princeton faculty reported to the Federal Election Commission (FEC) show 98% went to Democratic candidates or Democratic affiliated groups; 2% went to independent candidates or affiliated groups; and 0% went to Republicans or affiliated groups. This shows an alarming lack of viewpoint diversity as measured by donations to political candidates. Our findings are in line with similar studies of Yale and Harvard faculty.
Princeton spent $240,000 on congressional lobbying in the first three months of the year, the second-highest spending total of any quarter in recorded history. The University’s Lobbying Disclosure Act filing shows lobbying efforts spanning issues including scientific research, financial aid, immigration issues, and the recently increased endowment tax.
The increased spending comes after the Trump administration cut hundreds of millions of dollars in federal grants to the University, investigated Ivy League institutions over allegations of antisemitism, and ended a program sponsoring active-duty service members in graduate studies.
A topic of recent debate in the media and on college campuses is the Pentagon’s decision to sever ties with several Ivy League and elite universities. This includes Princeton University. This move follows Secretary of War Pete Hegseth’s characterization of these institutions as “ Woke Breeding Grounds.” The goal is not to prevent these men and women from attending college but instead to direct them towards institutions more ideologically aligned with the viewpoints of the current administration. While this is the administration's prerogative, as someone who has served in both the Marine Corps and the Army as an infantryman, and am now a Princeton student myself, I am skeptical about this move.
Active-duty military members should not be barred from educational choices if given the opportunity, especially at a time when attending college can determine your future, and where you have gone to school matters. It is also a blow aimed at the wrong people.
The probability that universities can reform themselves from within, in the absence of powerful external pressure, is very close to zero.
People who have seriously thought about the state of our universities are not only skeptical about the possibility of reform from within, but are also pessimistic even about the possibility of creating successful new universities. My intention is not to discourage people from trying, far from it since I consider myself firmly in the camp of reformers, but rather to draw attention to the enormous obstacles we face.
In a series of February memos, the University informed faculty and non-union staff of raise cuts and benefit reductions for the coming fiscal year, with a decrease in personnel also on the horizon.
The adjustments to employee pay and benefits came shortly after the annual State of the University letter from University President Christopher Eisgruber ’83 reported that the University would be tightening its budget primarily due to declining long-term endowment return expectations and continued uncertainty over federal funding. Eisgruber discussed some of the raise cuts at his annual Council of the Princeton University Community town hall on Feb. 9.
Hayk Yengibaryan
Daily Princetonian
Excerpt: Robert P. George, the McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence in Princeton University’s politics department and the director of the James Madison Program in American Ideals and Institutions, announced in a public Facebook post Monday that he has resigned from the board of trustees of the Heritage Foundation after six years. George’s resignation came amid a weeks-long controversy in the right-wing think tank after its president defended Tucker Carlson’s interview with far-right commentator Nick Fuentes.
George did not respond to requests for comment in time for publication
