If Romney Wins, University Could Lose Federal Funding

The race between newcomer W. Mitt Romney and Sen. Edward M. Kennedy '54-'56 is close--and Harvard is afraid. Should Kennedy lose, administrators say the University is likely to lose as well.

Their concern isn't so much about Romney, who has yet to state his positions on issues of higher education, but about Kennedy--and his role as chair of the Senate committee on labor and human resources.

As a senior Senator who directs the committee that deals most with education, Kennedy succeeded in passing six major education reform bills through the 103rd Congress alone.

If voters choose Romney on Election Day, University lobbyists fear they will lose precious Congressional support.

"Senator Kennedy has been a true champion of higher education and a strong supporter of universities in general," said Jane H. Corlette, director of governmental relations for health policy. "It would certainly be a loss [if Kennedy lost]."

The main issue at stake is money. Harvard receives about 17 percent of its funding from the federal government, Corlette said.

The federal money goes primarily to funding Harvard's research, with a smaller portion to student financial aid.

This funding, which accounts for a large percentage of the University's research budget, is essential for "maintaining competitiveness," Corlette said.

Over the past few years, Corlette added, Kennedy has defended university concerns against a Congress committed to cutting spending.

In fact, Kennedy stands out as the strongest supporter of higher education in Congress, said Washington D.C. lobbyist Nan Nixon, Harvard's director of federal relations.

"Word of mouth tells you who's apt to be more sympathetic. You go there and see if it's true," Nixon said. "Senator Kennedy has always been sympathetic."

Because Kennedy represents Massachusetts--the only state in which students at private universities out-number those at public institutions--Harvard especially benefits from his influence, Corlette said. "The state will lose a lot of clout if it loses Senator Kennedy," she added.

Hard to Lobby

Lobbying for Harvard is already hard enough because Capitol Hill perceives Harvard as wealthy, and therefore less deserving of federal aid, Nixon said.

"The government will at times say, well, Harvard doesn't need the money," she added. "And they don't give it."

For every $1 the federal government pays for financial aid to Harvard students, about $9 come from the University itself, Nixon said.

For that reason, Harvard must band together with other universities and nonprofit agencies to advance its cause. "It's very difficult currently to work on your own in much of anything," Nixon said.

Because lobbying for a university like Harvard is fraught with difficulties, loyal Congressional allies are especially important.

Kennedy's success in promoting the concerns of higher education is due in part to his effective negotiating skills, Harvard lobbyists said.

Education is not so much a matter of party politics as a matter of leadership, Kennedy spokesperson Jim P. Manley said. "Senator Kennedy has worked in a bipartisan fashion with both Democrats and Representatives on the Labor Committee," he said.

But Kennedy's endangered bid for reelection is not the only thing that puts Harvard's research in Jeopardy.

As Congress moves to slash federal budget deficits, it continues to cut spending for a variety of government programs including university research spending.

"In the years to come, discretionary funding for a whole host of programs is going to come under increasing pressure," Manley said.

For this reason, whether Kennedy loses his Senate seat or not, Harvard's future "doesn't look too bright," lobbyists said.

"I'd like to be encouraging, but I'm not sure I can be. If the budget remains as tight as it has been, and there's less and less to cut, it has to be more difficult," Nixon said.

If Kennedy loses, either Sen. Christopher J. Dodd (D-Conn.) or Sen. Nancy Landon Kassebaum (R-Kansas) will take his place as chair of the labor and human resources committee--depending on which party wins the Senate majority.

But administrators say a Kennedy defeat would have such dire consequences for Harvard that they have barely considered the possibility.

"We would lose such an important advocate for higher education," Nixon said. "I haven't let myself think about the implications of that yet.

The main issue at stake is money. Harvard receives about 17 percent of its funding from the federal government, Corlette said.

The federal money goes primarily to funding Harvard's research, with a smaller portion to student financial aid.

This funding, which accounts for a large percentage of the University's research budget, is essential for "maintaining competitiveness," Corlette said.

Over the past few years, Corlette added, Kennedy has defended university concerns against a Congress committed to cutting spending.

In fact, Kennedy stands out as the strongest supporter of higher education in Congress, said Washington D.C. lobbyist Nan Nixon, Harvard's director of federal relations.

"Word of mouth tells you who's apt to be more sympathetic. You go there and see if it's true," Nixon said. "Senator Kennedy has always been sympathetic."

Because Kennedy represents Massachusetts--the only state in which students at private universities out-number those at public institutions--Harvard especially benefits from his influence, Corlette said. "The state will lose a lot of clout if it loses Senator Kennedy," she added.

Hard to Lobby

Lobbying for Harvard is already hard enough because Capitol Hill perceives Harvard as wealthy, and therefore less deserving of federal aid, Nixon said.

"The government will at times say, well, Harvard doesn't need the money," she added. "And they don't give it."

For every $1 the federal government pays for financial aid to Harvard students, about $9 come from the University itself, Nixon said.

For that reason, Harvard must band together with other universities and nonprofit agencies to advance its cause. "It's very difficult currently to work on your own in much of anything," Nixon said.

Because lobbying for a university like Harvard is fraught with difficulties, loyal Congressional allies are especially important.

Kennedy's success in promoting the concerns of higher education is due in part to his effective negotiating skills, Harvard lobbyists said.

Education is not so much a matter of party politics as a matter of leadership, Kennedy spokesperson Jim P. Manley said. "Senator Kennedy has worked in a bipartisan fashion with both Democrats and Representatives on the Labor Committee," he said.

But Kennedy's endangered bid for reelection is not the only thing that puts Harvard's research in Jeopardy.

As Congress moves to slash federal budget deficits, it continues to cut spending for a variety of government programs including university research spending.

"In the years to come, discretionary funding for a whole host of programs is going to come under increasing pressure," Manley said.

For this reason, whether Kennedy loses his Senate seat or not, Harvard's future "doesn't look too bright," lobbyists said.

"I'd like to be encouraging, but I'm not sure I can be. If the budget remains as tight as it has been, and there's less and less to cut, it has to be more difficult," Nixon said.

If Kennedy loses, either Sen. Christopher J. Dodd (D-Conn.) or Sen. Nancy Landon Kassebaum (R-Kansas) will take his place as chair of the labor and human resources committee--depending on which party wins the Senate majority.

But administrators say a Kennedy defeat would have such dire consequences for Harvard that they have barely considered the possibility.

"We would lose such an important advocate for higher education," Nixon said. "I haven't let myself think about the implications of that yet.