Intellectual Diversity bill introduced and moving forward in legislature

Remember when the Board of Regents promised to guarantee intellectual diversity through policy?

A number of legislators are accepting them at their word, but to paraphrase the words of Ronald Reagan, they’re also ‘trusting, but verifying:’ And the verification is coming in the form of House Bill 1087.

After two legislative hiccups last year, another bill to promote intellectual diversity on South Dakota campuses has been presented. According to the South Dakota legislature’s website, House Bill 1087 was filed on Jan. 25 and sent to the House Education Committee.

The bill has prominent backers in both the state’s House and Senate: Speaker of the House Steven Haugaard and House Majority Leader Lee Qualm are listed as co-sponsors of the bill.

Additionally, Senate Majority Leader Kris Langer and Senate President Pro Tempore Brock Greenfield are both listed as co-sponsors.

Last year, state lawmakers tried passing similar bills to no avail. The Argus Leader previously reported the failed bills were criticized for being unnecessary because of Board of Regents’ existing policy.


“We are very pleased that the Board of Regents has adopted the promotion of intellectual diversity as official policy for South Dakota universities,” she said. “We believe, however, that we must lock in these reforms by way of concrete steps toward implementation of the policy and via legislation.”

Read the entire story here.

21 thoughts on “Intellectual Diversity bill introduced and moving forward in legislature”

  1. With measles and TB outbreaks in states right now having Anti-Vaxxers speaking at our South Dakota university campuses will be a real treat if this intellectual diversity bill passes into low.

  2. The bill also introduces: 1) a requirement for three hours of US history and three hours of US gov’t to receive a bachelor’s degree; and 2) requires all baccalaureate students to take the 100-question US citizenship civics test and score at least 85%.

    1. This what you get when you compromise with lunacy. Codify quackery in exchange for basic civics. This is “Republican” leadership.

    2. That will add $1,000 to the cost of college – tuition,books, student fees, test costs – but that is okay because we are not raising taxes.

  3. This is a great bill! I’m glad to see it. Right now our campuses are controlled by left-wing nutjobs. We need to have a variety of voices on campus and that includes conservative voices

  4. Thank you legislators. We can’t keep giving tax dollars to these liberal indoctrination camps. We need serious reforms of cut them off

  5. Free speech on our campuses, yes! down with political correctness and the liberal thought control

  6. We have a problem in our colleges that must be fixed. But this will have zero meaningful impact. ZERO. And long-term will do harm.

    There is a leadership maxim: “If the “boss” has to resort to micro-managing his subordinates, has become an authoritarian whose influence is limited to his ability to micromanage on an hourly basis, has ceased to be a leader, and has become the greatest impediment to real change.

    When I read this Bill, this maxim screamed at me. To successfully combat authoritarianism and group think, one does not become a new flavor of authoritarian with your own flavor of group think.

  7. I don’t know how promoting free speech and a variety of opinions is “authoritarian”

    I’m all for this bill and can’t believe it took this long.

    Thank you to the legislators involved.

  8. Kyle,

    Good question. The problem is more fundamental and deeper than this. This bill deals with the issue at a level that will give the illusion it has done something. And, in the meantime, what occurs will continue below the surface.

    And, ironically, the bill uses mandates to oppose what its core is an insidious form of oppression. It reduces the fight to be analogous to that between the Russians and Germans in WWII. And, more important, we are ignoring the real problem.

  9. Students need history and civics studies to understand and appreciate this great nation’s foundation and the freedoms many have sacrificed for. It is evident that many millennials have not learned these. We mandate that students get so many hours of english, math, science, etc. There is nothing wrong with mandating a little history and civics too. It is not any more authoritarian than the mandates we now have.

  10. I’m all for this bill—kids are complete idiots, know no history at all. and they should hear all sides. hope this passes

    1. This should be dealt with in high school where it is fully within the appropriate power of the Legislature to deal with by curriculum graduation requirements.

      This imposition of stuff on adults is dealing with it after the horse is out of the barn. More importantly, it does not deal with the deeper issue. This bill just gives politicians another chance to lie to us by pretending to do something.

  11. there is no “local control”–it’s a state run system run by 2 liberal bureaucrats in Pierre. The whole thing is government. Either abolish the system or reform it to work correctly. I’m voting for the bill

  12. I agree that the Civics/citizenship test should be done at the high school level. Tacking it on to this “freedom” bill is a red herring. This is an attempt to sneak through a bill that has been stopped before because it’s not needed. Groups can come to the schools now to represent their views in a clear and open manner. Trying to sneak this in so groups can promote communism without getting blocked smacks of collusion

  13. Joni, exactly. Telling college students this (and they have to pay for) is insulting. Deal with it in high school.

Comments are closed.