←back to thread

A university president makes a case against cowardice

(www.newyorker.com)
450 points pseudolus | 1 comments | 03 Apr 25 12:29 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
carbocation ◴[03 Apr 25 13:17 UTC] No.43569175[source]▶
So far the fight/not fight decisions can be predicted in advanced based on whether an institution has a medical center with NIH grants.
replies(3): >>43569260 #>>43569513 #>>43569620 #
drooby ◴[03 Apr 25 13:49 UTC] No.43569620[source]▶
He states in the interview that Wesleyan has NIH grants. They are preparing to let scientists go if it comes to it.
replies(1): >>43569745 #
carbocation ◴[03 Apr 25 13:56 UTC] No.43569745[source]▶
Wesleyan does not have a medical center and according to the NIH’s public reporting, they have under $2 million in NIH grants, compared to $600 million for Columbia. (Edited from $400 million, which is the value cut.)

Wesleyan has a $250 million operating budget, so the (from what REPORTER indicates) $1.6 million in NIH funding represents 0.6% of their budget. In contrast, the $600 million in NIH funding to Columbia represents about 10% of its $6 billion operating budget.

So both in terms of absolute numbers and relative numbers, the NIH contributions to Wesleyan are de minimis.

replies(1): >>43574081 #
insane_dreamer ◴[03 Apr 25 19:15 UTC] No.43574081[source]▶
That makes a strong case for academic institutions not being substantially dependent on government research dollars.
replies(4): >>43575264 #>>43576448 #>>43579787 #>>43584246 #
1. gen220 ◴[04 Apr 25 15:56 UTC] No.43584246{3}[source]▶
It's ironic that we're re-discovering this in 2025, it was pretty transparent in the late 1960s and early 70s, to students protesting their govt-funded universities' involvements in supporting the Vietnam War. The demands of students back then involved withdrawing from govt-funded grants and programs.

If you take money from an entity, you become an extension of that entity.