The Left used to talk all the time about the need to “reform” everything, but now that they’ve been in the driver’s seat in many places, the reformers are conservatives who want to restore sanity. A good example is higher education, where “tenured radicals” have been running things for the most part. Now that the legislators who appropriate the money for state colleges and universities have begun looking at what’s going on, they are up in arms, complaining about interference in “their” business.

Consider the battle in Wisconsin over the Campus Free Speech Act. A bill to protect free speech and make the universities accountable for failures to do so has the Left furious in the Badger State. Professor Mark Zunac, who teaches at UW-Whitewater, discusses the fight in today’s Martin Center article. Ignoring the many ugly incidents of shouting-down, disinvitation, and violence, Wisconsin’s “progressives” declare it a phony controversy. One activist group goes so far as to claim that the bill is meant to give “safe spaces” for conservatives and would subject students to sanctions for speaking out. The bill has passed the state assembly and awaits action in the senate. Perhaps opponents will throw a tantrum the way they did over Governor Walker’s Act 10 reforms (that word again) back in 2010.

Another mini-war was fought over tenure in Wisconsin, which used to be the only state where having it was a matter of law. The Left wailed about that too, but now tenure policy is in the hands of the Board of Regents, not enshrined in law.

Zunac also discusses a reform that would allow students to opt out of paying fees that covered leftist campus stuff such as “Sex Out Loud” — too bad that proposal was removed. Campus organizations should raise their own money, not rely on money taken without the consent of students.

Returning to the free speech problem, Zunac mentions that back in May, Charles Murray spoke in Madison, but that the event was held at a private club to avoid the likelihood of a Middlebury type riot.

A closed forum such as this has the advantage of actually taking place, since the establishment where the event takes place can control who is admitted. However, as Murray himself noted, the format inhibits the kind of free and open exchange that was once the hallmark of liberal education. In the absence of institutional seriousness in addressing crises like that of free speech, this presently seems like a desirable option. But unless and until our public universities find seriousness, we will have politicians intervening in higher education.

That sums things up pretty well.