Why can't Ivies cope with losing a few hundred million?

Role of Federal Funding (Research vs Teaching)

• Many commenters stress that the threatened money is overwhelmingly research grants, not core teaching subsidies or undergrad financial aid.
• Grants fund faculty, grad students, labs, and carry large “overhead” payments (often 40–60%+) that support buildings, utilities, IT, compliance, and administration.
• Research and teaching are deliberately co-located so students can learn from active researchers and form the “next generation” of scientists.
• Cutting grants thus shuts down projects and pipelines of expertise, not just institutional surplus.

Executive Power, Law, and Free Speech

• Major debate over whether the president can unilaterally redirect or withhold congressionally appropriated funds.
• One side: Congress holds the “power of the purse”; using funding to punish disfavored speech or ideology is authoritarian and likely unlawful.
• Other side: Congress delegated broad discretion over grant pools and enforcement of civil-rights conditions (e.g., Title VI), so the executive can deny funds to institutions it deems noncompliant.
• Disagreement over whether courts and statutes still meaningfully constrain the presidency, especially after recent immunity decisions; some argue the system now runs more on politics than law.
• Obama-era Title IX “Dear Colleague” letters are cited as precedent for using funding threats to force campus policy; others say Trump’s blanket, punitive cuts are qualitatively different.

Public vs Private, Ivies vs State Schools

• Some argue public money should go only to public universities; private schools are likened to hedge funds with side businesses in education.
• Counterargument: grants should go wherever the best research and researchers are, regardless of ownership; this is “paying for a service,” akin to hiring a private contractor.
• There is tension between rewarding elites that already have huge endowments and recognizing that many top researchers actually are at those elites.

Endowments, Nonprofits, and “Why Can’t They Cope?”

• Endowments typically spend ~5% annually; dipping into principal heavily isn’t sustainable over centuries. A $400M cut can be a large fraction of annual usable income.
• Universities already leverage endowments and issue bonds; some assets may be pledged, limiting flexibility.
• Critics say universities behave like tax-advantaged investment funds, with bloated administration and hedge-fund-scale compensation, undermining their nonprofit rationale.

Culture War, Inequality, and Access

• Ivies are seen as gatekeepers to “the Club,” with value rooted in exclusivity and networks; that fuels resentment among those excluded.
• Commenters note college and funding debates have been subsumed into a broader culture war (rural vs “coastal elites”), crowding out serious discussion of cost, access, and quality.
• Historical funding cuts, wage divergence, and administrative bloat are blamed for making “working your way through college” largely impossible.

Impact on Research, Innovation, and Pharma

• Multiple comments emphasize that federally funded university research underpins major industries (notably pharmaceuticals) and public goods (e.g., basic science, medical advances).
• Typical pipeline described: government funds basic research; universities discover ideas; patents/licenses are often captured by private firms that then profit, sometimes via “patent extension.”
• Some argue this system is unfair yet still yields high national ROI; slashing grants for political reasons risks long-term damage to scientific capacity, drug development, and U.S. soft power.