The Daily Signal - Philanthropist Halts Higher Ed Donations

Episode Date: July 28, 2023

INTERVIEW | Tom Lewis is among America’s most generous philanthropists. Over more than 20 years, his T.W. Lewis Foundation has funded causes helping children and families, educational institutions, and nonprofit organizations like The Heritage Foundation. But he’s now taking a different approach with colleges and universities after a controversy at Arizona State University. Lewis pulled his funding following the school’s mishandling of an event with Charlie Kirk and Dennis Prager in February. The Arizona State event was hosted by the university’s T.W. Lewis Center for Personal Development. It sparked outrage from professors and accusations of censorship from the center’s former executive director. Lewis spoke to The Daily Signal about his decision to pull the funding and the state of higher education in America. Listen to the full interview on "The Daily Signal Podcast" or read a lightly edited version at DailySignal.com. RELATED: Tom Lewis on Finding Success and Happiness in Life Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

37 out of 47 faculty at Barrett signed a really nasty letter of condemnation for the event, but they were calling Prager and Kirk purveyors of hate and homophodes and things like that. And so it just got ugly. This is the Daily Signal podcast for Friday, July 28th. I'm Rob Blewey. And those were the words of Tom Lewis, one of our country's most generous philanthropists. Over more than 20 years, his T.W. Lewis Foundation has funded calls. helping children and families, educational institutions, and nonprofit organizations like the Heritage Foundation.

But last month, Lewis made news for another reason. It was a donation that he terminated with Arizona State University. You see, Lewis pulled his funding following the school's mishandling of an event with Charlie Kirk and Dennis Prager in February. The Arizona State event was hosted by the university's T.W. Lewis Center for Personal Development. and it sparked an outrage from professors and accusations of censorship from the center's former executive director. Lewis spoke to the Daily Signal about his decision to pull the funding and the state of higher education in America today. Before we get to my interview with Tom Lewis, let me tell you about another Heritage Foundation podcast. How do we take back America? It starts with ideas, ideas we take on offense to reclaim our country.

That's why I can't recommend the Kevin Roberts Show highly enough. It's a deep dive on critical issues that plague our nation, plus conversations with high-profile guests from across the conservative movement. It's a roadmap on how we can protect our nation from bad ideas and get it back on track. You can find the Kevin Roberts Show wherever you get your podcasts or go to heritage.org slash podcasts. Tom, welcome back to the Daily Signal podcast. We're always grateful to have guests to return and especially grateful for you, given your support for your support for. our organization. Well, thank you, Rob. I've been involved with heritage for a long time, and my respect for heritage continues to grow and really appreciate the work you do there, too.

When you appeared on our show last year, we talked mostly about your book, Solid Ground, a foundation for winning in work and in life, and I remember from that interview what an important role college played in your life. That's certainly relevant to the topic that we're talking about today, given the controversy at Arizona State. But before we get into that, I would really appreciate you sharing people about your life and why college and your experiences in the workforce shaped how you think and basically how you make donations with the T.W. Lewis Foundation. Yeah. You know, well, I grew up in Lexington, Kentucky. My family was my dad was Navy for 20 years. We moved around until I was about 12. And then we returned

back to my parents' home, which is Kentucky. And mostly my parents were from Eastern Kentucky, Appalachia, and I used to spend a lot of summers up there with a lot of the natives of Eastern Kentucky, and those were my relatives. But we grew up in Lexington, which was a nice town, pretty good schools, and I never considered going anywhere. I really couldn't afford it other than the University of Kentucky. And, you know, I became a big Kentucky fan when I got there anyway. with football and basketball, and it was right there in our backyard.

So I was kind of hooked by the time I was 13 on Kentucky. And I like to joke when I went there, I got a full scholarship coming out of high school. A philanthropist happened to die in a plane crash about that time. He set up a scholarship to go to University of Kentucky and major in an engine. And I got that scholarship and it was full tuition. And the tuition in 1967 was $115 a semester. So that's hard to believe now, but that's what it was. $900 for four years.

Okay. But the point, though, was that that scholarship meant so much to me. I mean, back then that was a big deal. And I was, you know, and my mother was happy and my family was happy. It meant a lot. I mean, so I really understood how much scholarships mean to kids coming out of high school. It's really an endorsement of them. I mean, somebody else other than their mother and father, you know, see potential in them.

And so that was my big impression there. And so, and then, you know, I was so active at Kentucky as a student leader. And really most of the things I learned was outside the class. for getting involved in campus activities and leadership activities, and living in a fraternity house, and just had so many friends, and it was so much fun and good teachers. And it was just a great experience, the most fun I've ever had in my life. So I've always been a huge advocate of college.

I love to travel the country and go to football and basketball games on different campuses. I just always enjoy being on college campuses and being around college students. And, but then, so, you know, when I became able to become a donor, which was, you know, over 25 years ago, I started, you know, donating to first University of Kentucky, then the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, where I got my MBA. And then later, in Arizona, where we live at ASU and the Barrett Honors College. And so for 20 years, I gave, you know, money to all three of these schools. and usually they were, you know, one to two to three-year gifts, and then I would, you know, they were supposed to do something, and then they didn't really do it, and then I would kind of get on them about it, and then they would promise to be better, and then I would do it again, and just over and over. And the 20 years that I gave to all three of these universities was really, I have to say, a steady series of disappointments, where, for example, you sponsor a class and you pay for a, a faculty member and they're supposed to teach a course on some subject and use books as resources.

Well, they refuse to use any book that a donor would recommend, but they don't tell you that. They just don't do it. And then they morph the content of the class away from your intent toward whatever they want to teach. So, you know, it was hard to really learn that. But that's what happened. And that's kind of a summary of what happened over the 20 years. And it makes me think of the saying, you know, how do things go bad? And, you know, the joke is at first it starts gradually and then it happens suddenly.

And I think that's really the short story of public universities in America over the last 40 years, really, is they've been gradually getting worse relative to their curricula and their product quality. And then when the George Floyd incident happened and COVID happened, it happened very sudden. And now, I think finally, most people are waking up to that. Tom, you mentioned your gift to Arizona State. of course you began giving several years ago, and you established there a center with your name on it. And, you know, it was quite prominent featured in the news over the last several months, given a controversial speech that took place given by Charlie Kirk and Dennis Prager,

two good friends of this organization and this show. The T.W. Lewis Center for Personal Development hosted that. Tell us what exactly transpired in February and what, led you to make the decision that you would no longer fund Arizona State? When my understanding is now they've completely disbanded the center that had your name on it. Yes. Well, you know, we have an executive director in this program in ASU called the T.W. Lewis Center for Personal Development.

And the concept behind that center was, first of all, to better prepare the students for the challenges and opportunities of life. and the way you prepare them is to make them smarter and make them stronger. So we were going to make them stronger by providing workshops on how to balance your checkbook and buy a car and have a speaker series on to get to talk to and hear from doctors and lawyers and people from all walks of life and all different career types. Because in college, nobody on our college campus has a clue about what It's like to navigate a career outside of academia. And so most people are not there to get a PhD.

So, you know, there's no one to give anybody any advice, and they don't bring in these kinds of speakers. So that's what the center was all about. We also, though, included in our gift agreement that it would be speakers that would address traditional American values like faith, family, freedom, and free enterprise. Well, I learned later that the free enterprise topic was very controversial. Most of the faculties were anti-capitalists.

They didn't want to teach free enterprise. They wanted to turn it into anti-free enterprise. But anyway, we went ahead with these speakers areas, and we had over 150 events. I mean, we had an event every week for a couple of years. years and it was really a great thing. We had a lot of, you know, 7,000 students at Barrett Honors College, and we had a lot of participation, and it was really a good thing. But then we kind of took on a big event to bring in Charlie Kirk and Dennis Prager, and

it was kind of a marquee event. We had it in the big auditorium at ASU called the Gamage Auditorium, sheets about two or three thousand people. We put on big events there. and we scheduled the event. We knew it would be controversial because of Prager and Kirk, but we wanted to make our point that, you know, this is America and this is free speech and these people are going to talk.

But the subject matter was health, wealth, and happiness. And, you know, knowing Dennis Prager and Charlie Kirk, and you know they're both strong men of faith, but they're also incredibly wise men. And then Robert Kiyosaki was. also on board to talk about wealth. So it was really a very positive topic. But then once that word came out, you know, ASU's reaction from the administrators as well,

you know, what are these people going to talk about? And we don't want them talking about anything political and we don't want them to, you know, they're starting to come up with these parameters on what they could say and couldn't say. And then the faculty got really crazy. and they all 37 out of 47 faculty at Barrett signed a really nasty letter of condemnation for the event. You can find it online,

but they were calling Prager and Kirk purveyors of hate and homophodes and things like that. And so it just got ugly. Now, then we went ahead and had the event. There was 1,500 people there, most of the students. a lot of non-students, actually. But what we learned right after it was how much the students had been suppressed, how teachers in the classroom had told them not to go to the event.

If they did go to the event, they might pay a price. And the students that did want to go didn't want to get filmed in the audience because they didn't want their teachers to know they attended. And so there's just all this behind-the-scenes suppression going on. The dean of the Honors College that Barrett called in Ann Atkinson, and they kind of wanted to quiz her about why she let this happen. And so it just got really ugly. And so it was pretty clear to me that I had no reason to continue supporting an organization like this.

Where a faculty is out of control, they're very radicalized. I'd say half of them are probably radical, but the other half of them are probably radical. but the other half of don't speak up. And the administrators were complicit, and in their passivity, it was their way of approving. And so they really did approve it. I mean, and they were,

a lot of those people don't believe in free speech. And they just don't think that if free speech is hate speech, then you can't say it. And they get to find what hate speech is. So it really showed, exposed, I believe, a very ugly condition in ASU that I think is, you know, in most big public universities, and not all of them, that is just this unwelcome attitude toward what we'll call conservative thinking and traditional thinking and religion and things like that that America has been

built on. So there was no way I was going to continue to write checks to them given the blatant disregard for the intent of our center. And so it was pretty easy to make that decision. I wrote a letter to the dean and the foundation at ASU and just told them that based on the level of hostility toward these speakers at this event, I could no longer trust them to really steward our fund. And so I terminated our agreement, which I had the right to do.

So that's the short story. Was this the first time that you've had to terminate a recurring gift of this nature? Yes. No, no, I'm sorry. I actually had two gifts to bear it. The first one lasted two years and was bigger. But then I realized how badly the faculty was performing. and so I terminated that agreement but told the dean I wanted to change the agreement

and back off on the funding to the courses because the faculty was not adhering to the plan. So I did do that. That was done quietly. And then we within a month implemented a new agreement. And so it really is, and then the new agreement was the one that I can. canceled after one year. So, yeah, so I've canceled it twice. Amazing. And what is your reaction to Arizona State President Michael Crow's response, which generated quite a bit of publicity that he had to come out and state and adhere

that Arizona State was adhering to free speech principles? Yeah, well, first of all, you know, the Arizona State Legislature called a hearing. It was a one-day hearing. They had Dennis Prager come and speak that other people, the director of the program, spoke. I did not attend that, but I watched it. And so the state legislature, which is conservative, or is led by conservatives, had that hearing. And then the conclusion was they would give ASU 60 days to respond to the accusations, really. And I think, you know, Michael Crow has kind of tried to stay out of this. I think he's not really said much at all.

He did come out with a statement that said something to the effect that there's some confused folks out here that don't understand free speech as it relates to ASU. Okay. And so I thought that was kind of interesting. But he's so buffered by his huge bureaucracy down there that I don't think. think he's really getting a straight story. I think in his mind, and Michael, I know Michael Crowe. He's a good man, but he's in the ivory tower, and he, I think in his mind, ASU is a bastion of free speech, but he doesn't know what's really going on. And his close advisors aren't telling him. And so I think this media is getting his attention.

And they've now hired a law firm to represent them in its hearing request. And so it's being elevated to a higher level. But, Rob, you know, what I want to say to your listeners, though, as a longtime lover and donor to universities, is that we need to fix these organizations. But before you can solve a problem, you have to understand it. And briefly, here's what I think is the problem. it starts really with the faculty.

They've become more and more radicalized, especially the younger ones. They don't want to teach. You know, they want to teach a, you know, it's always been a three, three load, three courses per semester.

That's not very much. They want to teach two, two loads. They want to have six students in their classes or fewer students. They complain about too many classes, too many students. You know,

they don't believe in free speech. On most campuses, there's this concept. It's really misleading. They call it shared governance. And it's, you know, the presidents of the universities use that phrase because they share governance of the university with faculty. And so, in other words, that gives faculty this concept that they have a voice

and their voice matters. Well, most of the time it doesn't matter, but they like to be led to believe that it does. And then there's this issue of academic freedom. You know, academic freedom has always meant, used to mean the freedom of a professor or teacher to pursue truth in their discipline wherever it leads them. That was always the definition of academic freedom. But like the left always does, they redefine things. And so they've now expanded that to where they have, they have. somewhere I read a statement that they believe they have the right to weigh in on any social

or political issue inside or outside the classroom and say whatever they want, whenever they want to want to whoever they want. So they feel like they kind of have this superior freedom. And, you know, I got a phone call yesterday from a student at Barrett that was really upset by this. She was a foreign student, but she wants to talk to me about how she felt. whenever she would want to say something that they didn't agree with. And so there's a lot of kids like that, and my heart goes out to them.

But anyway, the faculty is kind of, to me, the problem, and it's literally the inmates running the asylum. You know, because they, and if you look around at the university and you try to find the person that is in charge of improving curricula, you can't find them because there is no one. One time I was talking to a provost who is supposed to be the top academic officer of a major university, and I asked him what his top goal was, and that was kind of a trick question.

I want to see what he said. And he said, increasing enrollment by 20%. I mean, so that's the chief academic officer. That's what they want. They know that college applicants are going to. down. They know out-of-state students pay more. They know international students are easy to get and pay more. So that's what they're trying to do, and they're all competing with each other. But the administrators, though, are complicit in all of this, and they act like they're not.

They act like they're above it. Michael Crow's comment when someone asked him, what's going on at ASU after this event, his reaction was, well, that's just faculty being faculty. You know, it'd be like your children throwing spears at somebody, and then the parents saying, oh, that's just kids being kids. You know, so that's what he said, faculty being faculty. But so there's really, you know, the administrators are complicit in the whole thing, and the faculties are kind of the point of the spear. But I think the solution, I think get a Republican governor, I was just in Aspen yesterday. with the Republican Governors Association, and there's a lot of good Republican governors,

26 of them right now. And like Ron DeSantis, they can first pull DEI and CRT out of the classroom. This thing right now through Title IX and DEI bureaucracy, most universities had a DEI officer in every college. And so, for example, at the University of Kentucky, 26 colleges. They have 26 DEI officers, usually full time. So these are just people that are running around trying to enforce all these, you know, race, gender class, racial kind of

perspectives on everything. And then this whole concept of inclusion is, so anyway, I think we start eliminating DEI and CRT. But, you know, I think donor pressure, on funding. I mean, donors need to wake up and realize what they're funding. And I think most of the main donors at these public universities are conservatives. I mean, I know the two biggest donors at ASU. They're both friends of mine. They're both conservative. I know the top three donors at the University of Kentucky, they're all conservative. So somehow the conservatives tend to be the big donors. And I think you're going to see a lot of that changed.

Having recently interviewed Chris Rufo about his new book, America's Cultural Revolution, it's quite clear to me that this is the left's long march through institutions, and it's the consequence of that. A two-part question for you, Tom. You said you recently spoke to a student. So how should students who hold Christian or conservative beliefs navigate the anti-free speech environment that you speak of on college campuses. And then also, to your last point, what advice do you have for others who may be in a similar position to you as donors?

Yeah, well, I say first on the students, I mean, it's hard because if you're 19 years old, you want to fit in and you want to kind of go along and that's very natural. So that kind of, that's why the suppression is so unfair. But I think, first of all, today, if you're a conservative student, I think you have to get a support group, and then you have to stand together, and then you have to raise your hand and speak out and let the chips fall and not be intimidated, but you do mean a support group of other students, and that's what I would hope for. And then I think relative to other donors, I mean, every donor has their own reason for giving. And, you know, in mind was just always to try to help students, you know, have better lives and better careers and find their talent and things that I talk about in my book.

That book was written for college students, really, on how to be successful. And, you know, it was also based on a lot of myths that are being promulgated out there today, like, you know, find your passion, do what you love. You know, live your dream. 30 is the new 20. You work smarter, not harder. That's what they're hearing. So it's really bad, it's not just bad advice. It's terrible advice.

And it's wrong. And so it doesn't work. So that's really why I wrote solid ground was to try to address the many myths that are out there in culture. And they basically are living loud at public universities. Tom, how will this recent controversy and your experiences with higher ed shape how you make future gifts from the T.W. Lewis Foundation? Well, I'm going to take a pause on any public universities for a while. I'm pretty much wrapped up there, and I am wrapped up there. And so, you know, our foundation is very active.

We give to a lot of different causes from, you know, foster children to battered women. to Christian education, to medical programs for melanoma and migraines, to organizations like Heritage and Arizona First Policy Institute, and a lot of the good conservative groups in D.C. that are really making a difference for our movement. So there are plenty of good organizations to give to. There's no shortage. But you just have to pick and choose.

And I think, you know, as I've become a – an experienced donor, you know, I have expectations for every gift that we make, and I think that's appropriate, and that when the expectations aren't met, you maybe give them another chance, and then if they don't do it, you go somewhere else. And that's what I think everyone should do. Well, I appreciated the advice that you circulated in the wake of everything and suggesting that these universities should really talk to their customers, the parents and the students, who are the ones who are ultimately supposed to be there in a learning environment and hopefully

learning the American principles of free speech as first and foremost. And so just closing words from you as to where you see things going next. I mean, are you leaving us on an optimistic note or are you leaving us on a pessimistic note about the future of higher ed in America? Well, I think we're kind of at a bit of a crossroads. I think there's not much optimism out there right now in the public universities. I think public universities need what K through 12 is getting, which is school choice, or let's call it school freedom. So, you know, I think we need to increasingly offer alternatives to public education or public university education. I mean, there's a lot of those out there from two-year trade programs to community colleges to small colleges.

And I think parents are going to need to get involved and get a little smarter about what's going on in the school where they're sending their children. Because so many parents in America over the last 20 years have sent their kids away to college. and then when they come back, they don't recognize them. And as Dennis Prager talks about a lot, you know, there's so many kids that don't even talk to their parents anymore. So you really need to be, as a parent, very aware of what the school is teaching. Tom, I really encourage our listeners to pick up a copy of your book. Again, it's called Solid Ground, a Foundation for Winning in Work and in Life. Leave us with some thoughts about where they can follow your work, pick up a copy of the book.

anything else, closing thoughts on your mind today? Well, you know, we're getting a little more active on social media. Our handle is T.W. Lewis. And so we're beginning to put some more messages out there. And also promoting the message of Solid Ground, because I still think that's very relevant. But it's an interesting world, and I think we see a big challenge here. and I think there's a lot of people that are really upset and have seen this thing happening in universities

for a long, long time. And I've heard from hundreds of people, many that I don't know, some from as far away as London, England. And so this is, I think, touching a nerve. And I think that's how solutions begin, you know, is awareness. Well, Tom Lewis, thank you so much for standing up for these important principles and for the many contributions you've made to help our country and help so many individuals benefit and have an opportunity just like somebody gave you

when you were approaching college yourself. We're grateful that you would join us again on the Daily Signal podcast, and we'll be sure to include a link to that previous interview in our show notes. So for any listeners who want to check that out, they are able to listen to that interview from last year. And Tom, please keep us posted on what you have happening in the future. We'd love to have you back again. Well, great, Rob. Always look forward to talking with you and look forward to staying in touch.

And that'll do it for today's episode. Thank you for listening to The Daily Signal Podcast. If you haven't had a chance, be sure to check out our evening show right here in this podcast feed, where we bring you the top news of the day. Also, make sure to subscribe to the Daily Signal wherever you get your podcasts and help us reach more listeners by leaving a five-star rating and review. We read all of your feedback. Thanks again for listening.

Have a great day. And we'll be back with you at 5 p.m. for our top news edition. The Daily Signal podcast is brought to by more than half a million members of the Heritage Foundation. Executive producers are Rob Luey and Kate Trinco. Producers are Virginia Allen and Samantha Asheras. Sound designed by Lauren Evans, Mark Geinney, and John Pop. To learn more, please visitdailySignal.com.