New York (1999)

Within a 2-week time period, multiple state bills were introduced that could turn campus debate on its head.  The bills were dropped in February by state legislators in New York and California.  Both sets of bills would prohibit the use of mandatory student fees for activities or groups that are considered "political and ideological".

This legislation is trying to limit what many argue is exactly the thing that's most vital to a campus community.  "To put into practice the ideas people are learning in the classroom is one of the things that is most valid and most valued," says Michael Krasner, Co-Director of the Taft Institute for Government.  Krasner is an Associate Professor in the Political Science Department at Queens College.  He continues, "We do expensive internship programs for the same purpose...to combine real world experience with their (students') learning.  The campus organizations that involve students in a whole range of ideological and political activities serve the same purpose and serve the same principle."

Free speech experts also question whether this is an arena that state legislators should enter.  Paul McMasters, First Amendment Ombudsman at the Freedom Forum, understands that funded programs might conflict some students' beliefs, but thinks legislative mandates about campus speech should be critically scrutinized.  "This is not an occasion for a blunt instrument.  The widest possible latitude should be given to comment and inquiry," says McMasters.

Despite this recent flurry of activity, campuses probably won't see a change in the law anytime soon.  "The chances of AB 829 and SB 1141 passing are next to none," says Lance Lewis, Legislative and Public Affairs Coordinator for the California State Student Association.  He notes that the substance of these bills has been heavily litigated in the past and the courts have held that students have the right to spend their money as they choose.  "Clearly, the authors of these bills care little about what the courts have ruled and are intent on depriving students of a basic constitutional right to free association and public expression," concludes Lewis.

New Yorkers have succeeded in stopping similar legislation from passing in each of the last ten years.  All of the bills have been referred to education committees.