Democratic lawmakers in Michigan mostly avoided responding to the University of Michigan’s announcement this week that it will roll back its Diversity, Equity and Inclusion programs. On Thursday, the state’s flagship university announced it will no longer ask for diversity statements from faculty when considering hiring, promotion or tenure.  

Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, Sens. Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), Gary Peters (D-MI) and Sen.-elect. Elissa Slotkin (D-MI) did not respond to multiple requests for comment from Jewish Insider about Michigan ending required diversity statements, which ​​some of Michigan’s most high-profile DEI initiatives rely on. 

Rep. Debbie Dingell (D-MI), whose district includes Ann Arbor and the University of Michigan, similarly didn’t respond to a request for comment.

Rep. Haley Stevens (D-MI) told JI that while she “can’t speak to the specifics of this decision, refining our approach to higher education to better serve students — especially by lowering costs, ensuring student safety and hiring diverse faculty — are concepts I embrace.” 

“Making sure our campuses are diverse and welcoming places for every student regardless of background and include faculty from every demographic, especially after the Supreme Court ended affirmative action, is the mission of good higher education,” Stevens said. 

The decision, made by University of Michigan Provost Laurie McCauley, follows an Oct. 31 recommendation by an eight-member faculty working group to end the use of the statements, which have been criticized for their potential to limit freedom of expression and diversity of thought on campus, according to a statement from the university.  A survey conducted for the faculty committee, appointed by McCauley, found more than half of Michigan faculty members believed diversity statements placed pressure on professors to express “specific moral, political and social views,” The New York Times reported. 

While critics of DEI say its programs have increased anti-Jewish prejudice and have called for an end to DEI bureaucracy (several red states are working on passing laws to ban it and some schools, such as the University of Florida, already have), the University of Michigan continues to have one of the most expansive DEI programs of any U.S. university. 

A New York Times Magazine investigation published in October found that the university’s efforts have cost more than $250 million over a decade, more than half of which was spent on salaries and benefits for DEI staff — and the program has overwhelmingly left faculty and students frustrated as every university department was forced to adopt a plan to implement DEI ideology. 

The rollback comes amid a larger set of reforms being weighed by the university’s Board of Regents, although one regent told JI that changes are unlikely to be made before the annual budget meeting in June. Those reforms could include shifting more of Michigan’s overall DEI budget into recruitment programs and tuition guarantees for lower-income students, according to The New York Times. 

In conversations between Michigan’s DEI officials and the Jewish Federation of Greater Ann Arbor, “there is agreement that the goal of the university must be to be as inclusive and accepting and supportive of all types of diversity,” Rabbi Asher Lopatin, director of community relations at the federation, told JI. 

“Whether under the title or methodology of DEI or not, the Jewish community supports such goals,” Lopatin said.

Jordan Acker, a member of the eight-member Board of Regents and a Jewish Michigan alumnus, told JI that DEI programming — including any of the potential changes being considered — has failed to “effectively include Jewish students whatsoever.” 

“That is additive of other concerns I have about it, but it’s certainly a big one,” Acker, a Democrat, said, noting that he supports the decision made by McCauley on Thursday. 

“It’s the job of administrators to justify regents spending taxpayer and tuition dollars on programming, not the other way around,” Acker said. 

“We need to understand these questions about Jewish students and their belonging on our campus better, whether you call it DEI or anything else,” he continued. “From this past year it’s obvious that the DEI bureaucracy does not know how to handle Jewish students.”