Watch a previous report on Ohio State’s selection of Ted Carter as president in the video player above.

COLUMBUS, Ohio (WCMH) – When Ted Carter takes the helm of Ohio State University on Monday, he will have to navigate the rocky waters of politics and challenges to academia.

From politicians’ criticisms of colleges’ commitment to free speech to declining student enrollment, Ohio State – like other universities across the state and country – is facing pressure from all sides. At the same time, the university is moving forward with ambitious projects to bolster its reputation for innovative medical and scientific research, something Carter sought to do as president of the University of Nebraska System.

Carter, with decades of military experience and several years in higher education administration, is no stranger to institutional turmoil, especially in the form of political pressure. In fact, he’s leaving his current post during the University of Nebraska’s own time of uncertainty; as it faces a multimillion-dollar budget shortfall, the institution is navigating hefty cuts – including to academic programs and diversity initiatives.

On Jan. 1, Carter will enter a university under scrutiny, particularly from Republican lawmakers, about its perceived liberal bias and silencing of conservative viewpoints. In his first few months, he will oversee the implementation of a new, state-mandated intellectual diversity center to focus on American civics and the free exchange of ideas.

The Top Gun graduate and decorated flight officer may not have as much experience in higher education as previous presidents – and never at as large a university as Ohio State. He will also be the first Ohio State president in nearly 70 years without a doctorate or medical degree. But he has certainly had his fair share of experience maneuvering political strife.

Budget cuts mark the end of his short Nebraska tenure

In June, Carter released the University of Nebraska System’s plan to address an expected $58 million shortfall by the end of fiscal year 2024. The plan outlined specific goals: Increasing enrollment, reentering the Association of American Universities and boosting “operational excellence.”

In November, Carter released a $12 million budget cut proposal that would reduce funding for graduate teaching positions, remove open staff positions and cut $2 million to promote “instructional efficiency.” The proposal also included an $800,000 cut to the $1.1 million budget of the Office of Diversity and Inclusion at the Lincoln campus, including by eliminating positions and refocusing diversity efforts more broadly across the system.

The announcement stirred discontent among the university community, several of whom spoke against the diversity office cuts at a board meeting in December. More than 200 students and faculty signed a letter to the chancellor of the Lincoln campus, saying the proposed budget cut was “antithesis” to the university’s mission, the university’s student newspaper reported.

While most campuses have not yet announced proposed academic cuts, the Kearney campus announced the elimination of nine degree programs, including geography and theatre. The campus will also eliminate nearly 25 faculty positions from various departments.

Christina Falci, president of the American Association of University Professors at Nebraska-Lincoln, said in an interview that while the administration sought input from faculty, its communications about proposed budget cuts were “minimal and lacked transparency.” That made it difficult for faculty to counter with their own proposals, she said. 

She also questioned how cuts to academic programs would help achieve Carter’s stated goal of regaining entry into the AAU – a group of research universities that voted Nebraska out in 2011. 

“When you cut faculty and you cut programs, you’re going to have fewer course offerings for our students to take when they come here,” Falci said. “I don’t think that is going to improve our chances of getting into the AAU.”

After the December board of regents meeting, Carter clarified that no decisions would be made before 2024. While he wanted to prevent cuts to academic programs when possible, he said Nebraska must “accept the reality that we cannot be all things to all people.”

“Asking taxpayers to subsidize programs that produce little to no graduates for our state is, I believe, a cost we can’t afford,” Carter said in a release.

In Falci’s eyes, the budget cut process hasn’t demonstrated a commitment by Carter or other administrators to shared governance. That hasn’t always been the case, she said.

When Carter first joined Nebraska in January 2020, Nebraska was on the AAUP’s censure list, a list it joined in 2018 after a faculty member was suspended for the rest of her appointment without having a hearing. Carter made it a primary goal to get the university removed from the list – and through nearly two years of discussions among faculty, administrators and attorneys, he succeeded. 

The university changed the procedures for placing faculty on administrative leave and added due process protections, Falci said. Carter facilitated compromises that, in her 17 years as a professor at the University of Nebraska, she said she did not think would occur under previous administrations. 

“He had a choice, to listen to his lower level admin and the faculty on the committee, or to only listen to general counsel,” Falci said. “And this is what I appreciated about him, is that he decided to firmly listen to the faculty.”

It makes the current budget reduction process, and Carter’s resignation during it, more disheartening.

“We need some dedicated leaders to stick around if we’re really going to have permanent changes. So the fact that he’s proposing all these budget cuts and now is leaving – but wants us to maintain his policies – I find kind of problematic,” she said.

Carter supported DEI efforts at Nebraska amid political backlash

Years before mulling over a near 75% cut to the Office of Diversity and Inclusion, Carter defended the university’s commitment toward improving the college experience for minority students, particularly students of color. 

A 2021 announcement to address the enrollment and recruitment gap between white and Black  students and faculty sparked fury from prominent state leaders – including then-Governor Pete Ricketts and then-university board chair Jim Pillen, who months before had introduced a resolution formally opposing critical race theory in University of Nebraska classrooms.

Pillen, who is now governor of Nebraska, said in a statement at the time that the university must fight the “crusade to implement Critical Race Theory.” Ricketts said in a similarly critical statement that the Lincoln campus should focus on “educational excellence, not ideological indoctrination.”

In an open letter published on the university’s website in November 2021, Carter reflected on his own time promoting diversity initiatives in enrollment while superintendent of the U.S. Naval Academy. He backed the Lincoln campus’ plan to address institutional inequity as necessary to fulfill the university’s purpose. 

At the same time, he sought to assuage Republican politicos’ fears about liberal bias and indoctrination.

“We will not impose critical race theory, nor any theory, upon students,” Carter wrote. “We will not hire candidates based on their skin color. We will not close our doors to any qualified student. We will not limit the free, robust exchange of ideas on campus – one of the most cherished ideals in higher learning.”

Stepping into a similar political position at Ohio State

Carter’s letter 2021 expressed a sentiment that is echoed by the statements of Ohio State’s board of trustees as Ohio’s universities face criticism about hostility toward conservative viewpoints. 

Senate Bill 83, the “Higher Education Enhancement Act,” was introduced by Republicans in both statehouse chambers as a “course correction” to excessive emphasis on diversity, equity and inclusion on college campuses. It seeks to prevent many of the same things Nebraska lawmakers feared in 2021: Hiring decisions based on a commitment to diversity, professors requiring students to support certain ideologies to earn passing grades, and forcing students and faculty to undergo diversity training.

In the months after SB83’s introduction, the university has taken steps to demonstrate its commitment to free speech and intellectual diversity. In April, the university dropped required diversity statements from job applications, which SB83 would also outlaw. In May, the board approved a resolution updating campus free speech policies and declaring that “assuring intellectual diversity and promoting open dialogue are fundamental educational responsibilities of the university.”

The board also issued a statement in May opposing SB83 as unduly restrictive and threatening to shared governance, but emphasizing that it agreed with lawmakers that promoting the free exchange of ideas is vital to academic excellence.

“SB 83 raises important questions about 21st-century education and the role of the university in preparing students for civic engagement,” the trustees’ statement read. “Decisions on these issues and how they are resolved could impact our university’s ability to attract the best students, faculty and researchers, and ultimately the quality of higher education at all Ohio public universities.” 

When asked for comment, an Ohio State spokesperson referred NBC4 to Carter’s statements during an August news conference after the board announced he would become president.

At the time, Carter said he had not fully reviewed SB83 but as someone who served 38 years in the Navy, he takes upholding the Constitution – particularly the First Amendment – very seriously. He called “DEI” a “clickbait phrase” and said that diversity extended beyond race and includes “diversity of thought and diversity of people.”

He also vaguely referred to attacks on higher education across the country and suggested that “more dialogue” between universities and lawmakers is vital to getting everyone on the same page.

“What you’ll find is that I do it in an apolitical manner,” Carter said. “I know my lane, I am not a legislator.”