(NEW YORK) — The Trump administration has expanded its review of colleges and universities across the country this year, threatening to withhold critical funding from some institutions if they do not comply with administration’s policies.

Many universities rely on federal funding for a sizable portion of their research funding. According to Neeli Bendapudi, the president of Penn State University, it is “important” that the federal government “continue that tradition of investing in our higher education system because it’s a huge competitive advantage.”

She, along with several university presidents, recently spoke with ABC News’ Linsey Davis in a wide-ranging discussion on the future of higher ed for ABC News’ “All Access with Linsey Davis.

Bendapudi said that if Penn State had received the administration’s “Compact for Academic Excellence” memo, which offers preferential access to federal funding for higher education institutions, the university would have rejected it.

“It’s very important for universities to have the academic freedom to discuss,” she said. “It’s hard to imagine an institution of higher education where you’re not confronted by ideas and experiences that are not just echo chambers of your own. That is part and parcel of what it means to get a degree, right? So it’s very critical for us. Whoever you are, when you come in, we embrace you, you’re part of the culture of Penn State and we want you to succeed.”

In March, the Department of Education’s office for civil rights launched dozens of investigations into private and public higher education institutions, accusing the institutions of “allegedly awarding impermissible race-based scholarships and one university for allegedly administering a program that segregates students on the basis of race.”

Amid the investigation, a hold on federal funding put millions of dollars for critical research efforts at risk and threatened the progress of scientific innovation at various institutions.

Cornell University in Ithaca, New York, was among those higher education institutions that were investigated by the Trump administration over the past year.

Cornell’s president, Michael Kotlikoff, announced on Nov. 7 that the university had reached a $60 million agreement with the government that would restore more than $250 million in funding for research grants. Cornell was fined $30 million and agreed to invest an additional $30 million for research to support America’s farmers, according to the U.S. Department of Justice. The federal investigation into the university has since been closed.

Kotlikoff reflected on the agreement during the conversation on “All Access,” saying Cornell had multiple “complaints” lodged against the university through the DOJ’s office of civil rights.

“When we started out this discussion with the federal government, we had two goals. One was to restore our relationship with the federal government and restore our funding. And the second was to do it in a way in which we did not compromise our principles,” Kotlikoff said. “We did not have the government dictate our policies or our procedures. And I think we achieved both of those goals, but as part of that, we did agree for the government to end these suits at Cornell, which would have cost us in excess of 30 million to fight, [and] it was costing many careers while our grants were suspended.”

According to the memo, which was reviewed by ABC News, the administration demanded that universities ban the use of race, sex, religion in hiring and admissions; freeze tuition rates for five years; cap the undergraduate enrollment of foreign students; require that applicants take the SAT or a similar admission test as well as change governance structures in the universities that punish conservative ideas.

A White House official confirmed to ABC News in October that letters were sent to nine universities to get feedback about the memo and try to secure agreements. Since then, the offer was extended to other higher education institutions – none of which have agreed to the compact so far.

The University of Arizona in Tucson was one of the nine institutions that received the memo on Oct. 1. In a statement, university president Suresh Garimella said he had “not agreed” to the so-called “compact.”

Garmella said that some proposed federal recommendations “deserve thoughtful consideration” and some are “already in place at the U of A,” but he added that “principles like academic freedom, merit-based research funding, and institutional independence are foundational and must be preserved.”

“As a result, the university has not agreed to the terms outlined in the draft proposal,” Garmella said, indicating that the university submitted a statement of principles to the U.S Department of Education.

Garmella reflected on the university’s decision to reject the compact during the conversation with other presidents on “All Access.”

“The University of Arizona, I believe, demonstrated a serious and a transparent and a constructive approach to this national policy discussion,” Garmella said, adding that the university’s “comprehensive” response to the draft proposal “reflected our commitment to academic excellence, to accountability, to meaningful engagement.”

ABC News’ Arthur Jones II and Hannah Demissie contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) —  The Senate on Thursday failed to advance two competing health care proposals aimed at addressing a spike in costs that are expected for tens of millions of Americans who receive enhanced Affordable Care Act tax credits.

Both plans, one put forward by Democrats and the other championed by Republicans, failed to get the 60 votes needed.

Now, lawmakers will have only a matter of days remaining to address the expiration of the enhanced tax credits, and there’s little indication that any sort of breakthrough is on the horizon.

Here’s what the plans entailed.

Democratic plan: 3-year extension of expiring enhanced tax credits

The Democratic plan proposed a three-year extension of the enhanced Affordable Care Act subsidies that are otherwise set to expire on Jan. 1. The enhanced subsidies were originally put in place during the COVID-19 pandemic.

During remarks on the floor Wednesday, Minority Leader Chuck Schumer called the Democratic plan the “only realistic path left” to address the looming premium spike.

“We have 21 days until Jan. 1. After that, people’s health care bills will start going through the roof. Double, triple, even more,” Schumer said. “There is only one way to avoid all of this. The only realistic path left is what Democrats are proposing — a clean direct extension of this urgent tax credit.”

Even though Democrats are in the minority, they got a vote on their proposal as part of a deal struck by a small group of Senate moderates to reopen the federal government after a 43-day shutdown, which centered around Democrats’ efforts to address the expiring tax credits.

“What we need to do is prevent premiums from skyrocketing and only our bill does it is the last train out of the station,” Schumer said.

But Majority Leader John Thune made clear Wednesday that Republicans would not support the Democratic plan.

Thune called the Democratic proposal a “partisan messaging exercise” and said that Democrats’ claim that their plan would lower health care costs represented a “tour of fantasy land.”

Republicans have for months been saying that the premium subsidies require reform. Without changes, Republicans say, the enhanced subsidies create opportunities for waste, fraud and abuse and have driven up the overall cost of premiums.

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimated the Senate Democrats’ proposal would add nearly $83 billion to the federal deficit over the next decade. CBO also estimates that enacting the Democrats’ legislation would increase the number of people with health insurance by 8.5 million people by 2029.

Pointing to the cost of extending the subsidies, Thune said Democrats ought to put forward a program that makes modifications to the program.

“That’s not what they did … No changes,” Thune said. “Just continue to run up the cost. Run up the cost in the individual marketplace like that — but have the American taxpayers pay for it and then go tell people that you’re trying to keep their premiums down,” Thune said. “This does nothing, nothing, to lower the cost of health insurance.”

Republican plan: Do away with the enhanced tax credits and create HSAs

Republicans offered an “alternative” plan on the Senate floor on Thursday.

The Republican proposal, championed by Senate Health Committee Chairman Bill Cassidy and Senate Finance Committee Chairman Mike Crapo, would do away with the enhanced tax credits and instead take the extra money from those tax credits and put it into health savings accounts for those who purchase bronze-level or “catastrophic” plans on the ACA exchanges. Republicans say this will help Americans pay for out-of-pocket costs.

Under the plan, individuals earning less than 700% of the federal poverty level would receive $1,000 in HSA funding for those between age 18 and 49 and $1,500 for those age 50-64. Republicans say these funds could be used to help cover the higher deductibles on lower cost plans.

Republicans said that their plan will reduce premiums through cost-sharing reductions and tout that the plan stops payments to insurance companies. Thune called it a “very different business model” than what Democrats proposed.

“The question is do you want the government deciding this, ordo you want to put this power and these resources in the hands of the American people?” Thune said on the Senate floor on Wednesday. “American taxpayers. Patients. That’ what we’re about.”

Schumer had called it “dead on arrival.”

“I want to be very clear about what this Republican bill represents, junk insurance,” Schumer said. “Let me tell my Republican colleagues: it is dead on arrival. The proposal does nothing to bring down sky-high premiums; it doesn’t extend the ACA premiums by a single day. Instead, Republicans want to send people $80 dollars and pretend that is going to fix everything.” Schumer said.

Cassidy called Schumer’s categorization of his plan as a “junk plan” “so ironic.”

“These are Obamacare plans. These are the plans they put in place, except that when they did the plans, they’ve got $6,000 deductibles, or $7,500 deductibles. We addressed that deductible. We make these plans better,” Cassidy said. “We Republicans are trying to make it better. We want money in your pocket for your out-of-pocket [costs], and they want you to front the whole thing.”

Democrats also took umbrage with provisions in the GOP bill that prevent funds from being used for abortions. Schumer, on the Senate floor, called it a “poison pill.”

Sen. Patty Murray, the top Democrat on the Senate appropriations committee, was asked if she saw any way that Democrats could support the bill.

“Not with the choice issues in it, where they have made it that women cannot get access to an abortion through their plan,” Murray said. “I don’t see any way that this helps the people that are being hurt right now by the tax credits going away.”

Copyright © 2025, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.