SDSU prepares for federal education cutbacks
BROOKINGS, SD (KELO) — The president of South Dakota State University has concerns over the so-called 'Big Beautiful Bill' passed early Thursday morning in the U.S. House.
The bill's provisions include an overhaul of student aid, which critics say will drive up costs for students.
Governor Rhoden and Attorney General Marty Jackley tour the southern border
The bill's passage comes just one day after university presidents met with the South Dakota Board of Regents to discuss how proposed cutbacks within the U.S. Department of Education will impact their schools.
Administrators at South Dakota State University have already been tightening their belts in anticipation of fewer federal dollars flowing into the school.
'We hadn't put things in a freezer, but that we had them in a cooler. So we're trying to slow spending for travel and for purchasing equipment,' SDSU President Barry Dunn said.
SDSU President Barry Dunn says the Reconciliation Bill passed in the House will mean fewer research grants for the school, a trend that's already being felt on campus.
'Research activities here at SDSU have slowed down, research activities all across the nation, in human health and agriculture for example, have slowed dramatically and that's concerning,' Dunn said.
Dunn says the bill will also make it harder for students to access tuition grants and loans.
'The proposed cuts are very dramatic, cutting programs like work-study, the TRiO program, cutting completely out some loans, some federal loans,' Dunn said.
A federal judge has dealt the Trump Administration a blow by pausing efforts to dismantle the U.S. Department of Education and ordering laid-off workers back on the job.
'I think the orders that the president has made through executive orders have certainly been provocative and opened up the discussion, but I think the judges have stepped in have probably helped us all by slowing things down,' Dunn said.
Dunn says fall enrollment at SDSU is looking good. But he anticipates federal cutbacks in education could lead to uncertainty for students and programs starting next year.
Dunn says the school is asking the SDSU Foundation to provide more scholarship money for students due to the potential of fewer grants and loans coming from the federal government.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
2 hours ago
- The Hill
Massie on Iran strikes: ‘No imminent threat' to US authorizing that
Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) on Sunday slammed the United States's recent strikes against Iran, saying there was 'no imminent threat' to the U.S. to authorize them. In an interview on CBS's 'Face the Nation,' host Margaret Brennan stated that House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) said that ''the Article One power of Congress really allows for the president to do this. It was a limited, necessary, targeted strike,'' of the Iran attacks. 'Well, he's probably referring to the War Powers Act of 1973, but that's been misinterpreted. There were no imminent threats to the United States, which was what would authorize that. And I think that's peculiar to hear that from the speaker of the House,' Massie responded. On Saturday, Trump announced that the U.S. had bombed three Iranian nuclear sites, stepping into an ongoing conflict between Iran and Israel that kicked off the prior week. Massie quickly posted on the social platform X that Trump's bombing of Iranian nuclear sites was unconstitutional. Massie did his interview alongside Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), who is a co-sponsor of a war powers resolution with the Kentucky Republican to prohibit U.S. involvement in Iran. 'The tragedy in this country is that we keep entering these overseas wars. We triumphantly declare the mission is accomplished the day after. And then we're left with Americans burdening the consequences for decades,' Khanna said in the 'Face the Nation' interview.
New York Post
2 hours ago
- New York Post
New Texas law will require Ten Commandments to be posted in every public school classroom
Texas will require all public school classrooms to display the Ten Commandments under a new law that will make the state the nation's largest to attempt to impose such a mandate. Gov. Greg Abbott announced Saturday that he signed the bill, which is expected to draw a legal challenge from critics who consider it an unconstitutional violation of the separation of church and state. A similar law in Louisiana was blocked when a federal appeals court ruled Friday that it was unconstitutional. Arkansas also has a similar law that has been challenged in federal court. Advertisement 4 Gov. Greg Abbott announced Saturday that he signed the bill, which is expected to draw a legal challenge from critics. James Breeden for the NY Post The Texas measure easily passed in the Republican-controlled state House and Senate in the legislative session that ended June 2. 'The focus of this bill is to look at what is historically important to our nation educationally and judicially,' Republican state representative Candy Noble, a co-sponsor of the bill, said when it passed the House. Advertisement Abbott also signed a bill that allows school districts to provide students and staff a daily voluntary period of prayer or time to read a religious text during school hours. 4 The Texas measure easily passed in the Republican-controlled state House and Senate in the legislative session that ended June 2. AP The Ten Commandments laws are among efforts, mainly in conservative-led states, to insert religion into public schools. Texas' law requires public schools to post in classrooms a 16-by-20-inch (41-by-51-centimeter) poster or framed copy of a specific English version of the commandments, even though translations and interpretations vary across denominations, faiths and languages and may differ in homes and houses of worship. Advertisement 4 The Ten Commandments laws are among efforts, mainly in conservative-led states, to insert religion into public schools. Jay Janner/American-Statesman / USA TODAY NETWORK via Imagn Images Supporters say the Ten Commandments are part of the foundation of the United States' judicial and educational systems and should be displayed. Opponents, including some Christian and other faith leaders, say the Ten Commandments and prayer measures infringe on others' religious freedom. A letter signed this year by dozens of Christian and Jewish faith leaders opposing the bill noted that Texas has thousands of students of other faiths who might have no connection to the Ten Commandments. Texas has nearly 6 million students in about 9,100 public schools. Advertisement 4 Opponents, including some Christians, say the Ten Commandments and prayer measures infringe on others' religious freedom. AP In 2005, Abbott, who was state attorney general at the time, successfully argued before the Supreme Court that Texas could keep a Ten Commandments monument on the grounds of its Capitol. Louisiana's law has twice been ruled unconstitutional by federal courts, first by U.S. District Judge John deGravelles and then again by a three-judge panel of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which also considers cases from Texas. State Attorney General Liz Murrell said she would appeal and pledged to take it to the U.S. Supreme Court if necessary.
The Hill
3 hours ago
- The Hill
Senate parliamentarian rejects GOP's attempt to limit courts' contempt powers
The Senate parliamentarian has ruled against a controversial provision in the Senate Republicans' megabill that would have made it significantly more difficult for courts to enforce contempt findings against the Trump administration. The parliamentarian, Elizabeth MacDonough, ruled that limiting courts' ability to hold Trump officials in contempt violated the Senate's rules governing what can be passed with a simple-majority vote on the budget reconciliation fast track. Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer (N.Y.) hailed the parliamentarian's decision as a major victory. 'Senate Republicans tried to write Donald Trump's contempt for the courts into law — gutting judicial enforcement, defying the Constitution and bulldozing the very rule of law that forms our democracy,' Schumer said in a statement responding to the development. 'But Senate Democrats stopped them cold. We successfully fought for rule of law and struck out this reckless and downright un-American provision,' he said. The provision, tucked into the thousand-page bill House Republicans passed in May, would have required anyone suing the federal government to pay a bond before a court would be allowed to use its contempt power to enforce injunctions and other rulings. Courts have already ruled more than 190 times against the Trump administration since January. The controversial language received little notice when it came to the floor, and Rep. Mike Flood (R-Neb.) later caused an uproar at a town hall meeting when he admitted he didn't know the provision was in the legislation when he voted for it. 'If enacted, this would have been one of the most brazen power grabs we've seen in American history — an attempt to let a future President Trump ignore court orders with impunity, putting him above the law,' Schumer said Sunday afternoon. 'Donald Trump is not above the law. And thanks to Senate Democrats – including the tireless work of Senator Durbin and the Judiciary Democrats – the courts can still hold him and any president accountable,' Schumer said.
