Pritzker Defends Harvard’s Federal Funding as Threats From Washington Grow

Amid growing calls from Washington to defund elite colleges and universities, Harvard Corporation Senior Fellow Penny S. Pritzker ’81 made the case for why the University needs federal funding during an interview with The Crimson last week.

“This partnership between the federal government and Harvard University, and frankly, all universities, has offered a considerable return to the American people,” Prtizker said.

“If you think about the medical discoveries and treatments that contribute to the well-being of people across our country and the world, or the research and innovations that power our economy and improve our competitiveness, or the research that strengthens our national security, these are all to the benefit of the United States writ large,” she added.

Both Pritzker and University President Alan M. Garber ’76 are under subpoena by the House Committee on Education and the Workforce as part of its investigation into campus antisemitism. Since January, Harvard has weathered bipartisan calls from Congress to cut its federal funding over the University’s alleged failure to combat antisemitism.

Harvard’s uneasy relationship with Washington may further deteriorate as President-elect Donald Trump returns to the White House with Republican control of the House and the Senate. On the campaign trail, Trump and Republican allies repeatedly denounced Harvard and peer schools as bastions of leftism and a threat to conservative ideals.

Trump and House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) have both said Harvard could lose the accreditation necessary to receive any funding during Trump’s second term. While unlikely, the threats combined with new political power increase the pressure on Pritzker and Garber to ease tensions with Republicans.

The university currently receives more than $600 million in annual funding in the form of research grants and student loans and is subject to federal regulations. Trump allies have suggested that such regulations could be grounds for revoking funding.

“I think part of our job is to work with Congress to have them understand these contributions and why their investment in universities across our country is so important for the benefit of the United States of America,” Pritzker said, making her case for Harvard as calls to strip the University of federal funding grow louder.

In the interview, Pritzker said Harvard, under Garber’s leadership, will “continue to make the case for an effective and strong partnership between higher education and the federal government.”

“We take seriously any kind of criticisms from Washington,” Pritzker said.

Over the past year, Garber has made the trek to Washington to meet with lawmakers multiple times, including both Democratic and Republican leaders in Congress and members of the Biden administration.

Since Gay resigned on Jan. 2, Pritzker has been the subject of significant scrutiny from faculty members who criticized her role in selecting Gay and then for her role in Gay’s disastrous congressional hearing.

When asked what about Gay’s search made the Corporation decide it needed to reevaluate its presidential selection process, Pritzker said the pressure from Washington had changed considerations for such searches.

“We’re in a different time,” Pritkzer said. “We’re under enormous scrutiny from government. We’re dealing with changes in the culture of Harvard.”

As part of the investigation, Pritzker sat for an interview with the committee in August where legislators grilled her on the University’s negotiations with encampment protesters and Harvard’s disciplinary processes.

Documents released in the report revealed that Pritzker personally pushed for a condemnation of the phrase “from the river to the sea” and said it should result in disciplinary action under recently updated protest restrictions. After the report was released in October, a University spokesperson declined to say whether the phrase would result in disciplinary action.

Pritzker declined to comment further on whether she thought Harvard should enforce stricter disciplinary measures on protesters who use the phrase “from the river to the sea” in the interview.

“I made my statements in my testimony,” Pritzker said. “I’m going to let that stand for itself.”

“The University leadership — the administration — has adjusted the rules around time, place and manner of protest,” she added. “I believe that protest is an important use of free speech, but I think there's appropriate places and times for that. And the University is addressing that.”

—Staff writer Emma H. Haidar can be reached at emma.haidar@thecrimson.com. Follow her on X @HaidarEmma.

—Staff writer Cam E. Kettles can be reached at cam.kettles@thecrimson.com. Follow her on X @cam_kettles.