It probably doesn’t say so on the calendar, but this week was DEI week — from the Statehouse to the White House.

Yes, Idaho lawmakers had other things on their mind, as the state’s college and university presidents made the rounds at the budget and education committees. But not too much else.

They searched, unsuccessfully, for a pile of money the state will save after shutting down DEI-aligned student centers. They wanted to tally up the social justice job cuts, also to no avail. They dug through course descriptions for evidence of required diversity, equity and inclusion coursework, and again came up empty.

In other words, it was more of the same from Idaho’s DEI legislative session. An outsized focus on red-meat higher ed politics, fully aligned with the national zeitgeist.

The nation’s culture-warrior-in-chief was busy back in Washington, D.C., this week.

First, President Donald Trump ordered a freeze on federal grants — aimed partly at choking off funding for DEI programs. The freeze was rescinded as abruptly as it was announced, but not before sending shock waves through education circles. At one point, Idaho State University believed $25 million of its federal funds were in peril, President Robert Wagner said Wednesday.

By Wednesday, Trump had issued an executive order seeking to withhold federal money from schools teaching what he called “discriminatory equity ideology.”

The whirlwind from the White House coincides with the grinding, churning DEI debate at the Statehouse. The State Board of Education has already banned student support centers with a DEI focus. A far-reaching anti-DEI bill is in the works.

But Idaho is several years into this debate, and because of that, a few things should be clear by now. For openers, this isn’t really a budget debate.

Since 2023, the Legislature has banned colleges and universities from spending taxpayer dollars on DEI or “social justice ideology.” That means the universities have been forced to rely on private donations and voluntary student fees to cover their programs. But that hasn’t stopped Rep. Josh Tanner, R-Eagle, from asking, at multiple Joint Finance-Appropriations Committee hearings, about whether the state could cut spending as colleges shut down their DEI initiatives.

Regardless of the funding source, DEI has never been a big budget line item. Last fall, the University of Idaho pegged the cost of its (now-defunct) Office of Equity and Diversity at $1.3 million. This year, the U of I has a $195.8 million operating budget.

Similarly, the campuses haven’t been exactly overrun with DEI jobs. Boise State University had nine full-time staffers assigned to Gender Equity Center and Student Equity Center, which were closed in November. Nine jobs, out of nearly 1,250 full-time positions.

On top of that, all three universities say they are transferring these limited staff positions from the old student support centers to the one-stop shops the State Board favors. Boise State eliminated five positions last fall, but might need to create new positions as it ramps up its new, holistic Student Connections and Success Center, President Marlene Tromp told JFAC Wednesday.

Not surprisingly, lawmakers directed most of their skepticism at Tromp this week.

On Tuesday, in the House Education Committee, lawmakers drilled into a DEI certification program in the sociology department. Things got testy. An exasperated Rep. Chris Mathias, D-Boise, accused hardline colleagues of wasting precious time; equally upset, Rep. Dale Hawkins, R-Fernwood, responded, “This is our opportunity to address this.” What lawmakers addressed is an optional certification started in 2023, Boise State told Idaho EdNews Wednesday. Five students have completed the program so far, and six students are enrolled this spring. (Out of some 27,000 students, based on Boise State’s fall enrollment numbers.)

By Wednesday, JFAC’s search focused on University Foundations 100 and 200, a pair of required classes designed, in part, to teach students to “apply knowledge of diversity to address social issues of local, regional, national, and/or global importance.” Rep. Steve Miller, R-Fairfield, pressed Tromp about whether the course included required gender study.

No, said Tromp. UF 100 and UF 200 are mandatory classes, students can meet the degree requirement by choosing from a variety of topics. The UF 200 menu, for example, includes courses in sports films and literature, sci-fi writing and technology, among others.

This week’s presentations — and the constant simmer over DEI — made for some tense moments.

Before Wednesday morning’s JFAC hearing, House co-chair Wendy Horman, R-Idaho Falls, buttonholed Tanner, telling him to keep his questions civil.

When Tanner did question Tromp, he complimented Boise State for maintaining a balanced budget, and praised the women’s volleyball team for taking a stance against transgender athletics. Pleasantries aside, Tanner then described DEI as a pervasive mindset that he experienced, years earlier, as a Boise State student.

“How do you plan to root this out of the university?” he asked.

If social niceties were the order of the day Wednesday, Miller still worked in a few barbs. The normally low-key Miller was not buying Tromp’s explanation about the optional gender course.

“Thank you for not answering that,” said Miller, prompting Horman to restate Tromp’s answer.

It wasn’t an entirely lost cause for the presidents.

After making boilerplate and well-scripted presentations to the Senate Education Committee Wednesday afternoon, hardline conservative Sen. Tammy Nichols posed the inevitable DEI question. She wanted details about the schools’ compliance with the State Board order.

Afterwards, the Middleton Republican gave the presidents some surprising praise.

“Thank you for making the transition (into) something all students are able to participate in,” she said.

DEI may have been a small piece of Idaho’s higher education architecture. But now it’s a big fight. In the thick of Idaho’s DEI legislative session, the presidents will probably take any praise they can get. Especially when it comes from an unlikely source.

Kevin Richert writes a weekly analysis on education policy and education politics. Look for his stories each Thursday.