Jay Hartzell’s academic credentials are impeccable: A doctorate in finance; stints as a tenure-track professor, associate dean, dean, and even interim president. But in deep-red Texas, there’s another qualification for public-college presidents: the ability to manage immense scrutiny from conservative politicians.
That’s why Hartzell’s recent announcement he would be leaving the state’s flagship public university — the University of Texas at Austin — to head 200 miles north to the smaller, and private, Southern Methodist University, was at first greeted with surprise, followed quickly by knowing nods.
“Public universities in these politically charged environments are under siege,” said Michael Harris, a professor of higher education at SMU. “They face relentless ideological attacks from state legislators and are constantly forced to navigate resource challenges from years of underfunding. It’s really no surprise presidents are wanting to leave red-state public universities.”
For proof of this dynamic, look no further than Texas A&M University, where Gov. Greg Abbott, a Republican, this week publicly threatened to fire President Mark A. Welsh III, after rumors were posted online that the university’s participation in a conference for only Black, Hispanic, and Native American attendees violated the state’s diversity, equity, and inclusion ban. Welsh quickly announced that the university would no longer participate in the conference, saying its restrictions were “not in line with the intent” of the DEI ban.
As a private college, SMU isn’t subject to state-imposed bans or the public-records laws through which conservative activists and journalists can obtain the internal emails that often spark controversies like these. Nor is Emory University, whose presidency Hartzell’s predecessor, Gregory L. Fenves, took after five years in Austin. Presidents at private colleges are hired by boards that aren’t beholden to politicians for their seats, meaning political pressure is lessened.
The immense political scrutiny applied to presidents at public colleges in red states is quickly stratifying the nation’s higher-education system into three distinct systems, Harris posits, each requiring leaders with slightly different skills and credentials.
“There always were differences between public and private,” Harris said. Not every successful private-university president would make it at a public, and vice versa. “I think the gap has widened. I think we are moving to where there are private institutions, red-state public institutions, and blue-state public institutions.”
In the future, red-state public presidents must stay in culture warriors’ good graces to either be hired or stay hired. Presidents of blue-state publics, while dodging the hottest political fights, can still wage war in the legislature — although those battles tend to focus more on traditional issues of cost and access — while also fund-raising and managing the university. Private-college presidents are largely focused on fund-raising, enrollment, and academics.
Hartzell didn’t cite politics as the reason for his move, but stringent new regulation of the state’s public colleges was a reality of his presidency. The DEI ban led to layoffs at the university, along with constant threats to tenure and the risk of other possible legislation targeting the classroom.
He is far from the first president seen as leaving a political minefield for a calmer job. Kevin M. Guskiewicz left the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill for Michigan State University in late 2023 after he and the board agreed the political and philosophical differences between them necessitated a split. He was replaced by a politically connected former Board of Governors member, Lee H. Roberts, who has limited higher-education experience.
In the last 15 years, as the conservative movement renewed attacks on higher education, the temperature and volume of such broadsides at the state level has increased. In fact, the battle over higher education is largely waged at the state level, despite federal legislators’ and President-elect Trump’s fiery rhetoric about how universities should change.
Scott Walker, a Republican who was elected as Wisconsin’s governor in 2010 and served until 2019, was infamous for his battles with his state’s public universities. Recently, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, also a Republican, has been the most aggressive in using his appointment power to reshape his state’s university system, and the Republican legislature has prioritized regulation of higher education. (Governor DeSantis overhauled the board at New College of Florida and recently made similar appointments at the University of West Florida.) Governor Abbott and Texas legislators quickly followed suit. The two states’ DEI bans were implemented chaotically, with students and faculty accusing administrators of overcomplying while legislators accused them of skirting the laws.
Presidential lobbying in the statehouse has historically centered on conversations about funding. It has required college presidents to be experts in translating CFO-speak into politician-budget speak, showing legislators the value of their investment and the return to a state’s economy. Now, that doesn’t matter as much for red-state presidents. “You have to have someone who can work with the board and legislature, who has those conservative credentials,” said Harris, of SMU. Enter the politically connected, like Roberts in North Carolina, or New College President Richard Corcoran, the former speaker of the Florida House of Representatives.
Although public-college presidents have faced prominent political opposition, private-college presidents haven’t been left alone, said Hartwick College President James H. Mullen Jr., who has also served as chancellor at the University of North Carolina at Asheville. “There’s politics in both the private and public sector,” he said. “You are in a job where you have constituencies that you answer to. You are in a job where you have constituencies where they feel they have a central voice in the future of the institution.”
He added: “Private colleges are not immune to the need to ensure the support of state government. We receive significant state grants at Hartwick.”
The focus from elected officials is, however, more “profound” toward public colleges than private, Mullen said — and its intensity has grown. When Mullen was at UNC-Asheville 20 years ago, he had more time to cultivate lasting relationships with lawmakers. That work paid off, he said: “When we went for an ask, we had advocates in the legislature.” There’s less time for that now because, in part, the news cycle and social media make issues spin faster. “I used to have time to work on a response,” he said. “That’s true for both private and public, but maybe moreso for public presidents.”
Presidents have to be ready to play in the political world, Mullen said. Better yet, they have to like it.
“The job of a president is more like a mayor of a city than a CEO of a company,” he said. “You have constituencies and you have to understand how to bring consensus or support. You have to do that whether you are in a public or private institution. I think you have to enjoy politics — particularly if you are in a public institution. If that’s not what you see is part of the job of a president, the job can be very challenging.”
One way presidents have adjusted to the elevated scrutiny is by clamming up. “I don’t see the public president orators that we used to see,” said Teresa Valerio Parrot, principal of the higher-education communications firm TVP Communications. More and more presidents are either making middle-of-the-road statements or not talking at all because they are afraid of the fallout.
Presidents of eight public universities — including those in both red and blue states — declined, through their public-relations staff, interview requests for this story.
The changing realities of the presidency, contingent on place and institution type, may mean that qualified candidates take a pass on prominent public colleges due to political tumult. That could lead to a brain drain of talent away from public universities, which educate the most students and provide the most access to higher education, especially for those of limited means, Harris said.