Business
America’s Largest And Most Expensive DEI Program Is About To Go Up In Flames
The flag of the University of Michigan
From the Daily Caller News Foundation
By Jaryn Crouson
The University of Michigan’s (UM) multi-million dollar diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) program may soon be dismantled.
The university’s board of regents has reportedly asked UM president Santa Ono “to defund or restructure” the DEI office amid growing criticism and public pressure, according to emails shared on X. The board is expected to vote on the matter on Dec. 5.
“I write to share information with you about impending threats to the University of Michigan’s DEI programming and core values of diversity, equity, and inclusion,” Rebekah Modrak, faculty senate chair, wrote in an email to faculty senate members. “It has been confirmed by multiple sources that the Regents met earlier this month in a private meeting with a small subgroup of central leadership members, and among the topics discussed was the future of DEI at UM, including the possibility of defunding DEI in the next fiscal year.”
Calls for the university’s DEI program to come to a close surfaced after The New York Times exposed its failures and the vast amount of money being thrown at it.
“In recent years, as D.E.I. programs came under withering attack, Michigan has only doubled down on D.E.I., holding itself out as a model for other schools,” the NYT wrote in an October article. “By one estimate, the university has built the largest D.E.I. bureaucracy of any big public university. But an examination by The Times found that Michigan’s expansive — and expensive — D.E.I. program has struggled to achieve its central goals even as it set off a cascade of unintended consequences.”
Despite UM investing $250 million into DEI since 2016, students and faculty have reported a deteriorating campus climate since the program began and are less likely to interact with people of a different race, religion or political ideology, though these are “the exact kind of engagement[s] D.E.I. programs, in theory, are meant to foster,” the article stated. Attempts to create a more diverse campus also fell flat, with black enrollment at the university remaining a steady 5%.
The program also created a “culture of grievance,” with the office’s conception coinciding with an “explosion” of complaints on campus involving race, gender and religion, the NYT reported. Meanwhile, nearly 250 university employees were engaged in some form of DEI efforts on campus.
Modrak in her email referenced the article, calling it a “tendentious attack” that was “not well researched,” and claiming that the author “cherry-picked” examples of UM’s failures.
DEI staff cost the university approximately $30.68 million annually, with the average salary reaching $96,400, according to Mark Perry, an American Enterprise Institute scholar. Several DEI employees are paid more than $200,000 a year, while the department’s head makes upwards of $400,000.
“I think that across the ideological spectrum both regular citizens and policymakers have really shifted on issues of identity politics,” John Sailer, senior fellow and director of higher education policy at the Manhattan Institute, told the Daily Caller News Foundation. “I think a lot of people who would have at some point, probably just as a matter of knee-jerk reaction, supported diversity initiatives, have started to really reconsider what these initiatives are actually doing, and reconsider whether everything that falls under the name of DEI is actually something that they support. And so there was already the slow burn.”
The major catalyst of this change, Sailer explained, was the series of fiery protests that ravaged college campuses across the country after Hamas’ deadly Oct. 7, 2023 attack on Israel, which were “absolutely a big part of the story.”
“A lot of people were already skeptical of DEI,” Sailer said. “A lot of people were already of the opinion that these policies, even though they purport to be about diversity, in practice really have been about a particular ideological vision for higher ed. Then on October 7, I think a whole different part of the American electorate and a whole different constituency, many more people from the professional world looked at universities and thought, What on earth is going on? What is the problem here?”
The University of Michigan, like many other schools, was overwhelmed by violent protests that resulted in several arrests and criminal charges being filed against 11 students and alumni.
“It became clear that a part of the problem was we have these massive bureaucracies that should ostensibly promote treating people well,” Sailer continued. “And it was in fact a lot of people most involved with the DEI complex who were supporting these kind of radically anti-Israel, radically anti-West, at times, rudely antisemitic demonstrations.”
The reelection of former president Donald Trump on Nov. 5 likely played no small role in this shift either.
“I think now every elected official is aware that there’s something of a popular mandate to reform higher education, and that mandate existed before Trump was elected in 2024, but there’s also a kind of popular rebuke of the progressive identity politics,” Sailer said. “I have to think that the conversation that the University of Michigan’s regents are having about DEI would be different if there had not been this nationwide rebuke of identity politics that the election of Trump seems to represent.”
Trump has promised many reforms to the education sector, including abolishing the Department of Education entirely. The president-elect has also vowed to bring peace to Israel and Gaza and said that such efforts would help curb the rise in antisemitism in the U.S.
While several other schools have begun to dismantle DEI offices across the country, some in response to state laws barring the departments and policies, the case at the University of Michigan is unique. Most efforts thus far have been led by Republican lawmakers, such as in Texas and Florida, but in the blue state of Michigan, the university’s highest governing body is comprised almost entirely of Democrats.
“The fact that University of Michigan is an institution controlled by elected Democrats, the fact that its Board of Regents would consider doing something like this, I think it signals a broader shift,” Sailer said. “It’s a huge deal for the University of Michigan to even have this kind of reform on the table. It’s a huge deal because the University of Michigan is the exemplar when it comes to DEI. If the University of Michigan makes this decision, that marks a big shift.”
This move by the university could signal others to follow suit.
“It could be just a massive step towards broader higher education reform,” Sailer told the DCNF.
UM and the Board of Regents did not immediately respond to the DCNF’s request for comment.
Business
Solar and wind power make electricity more expensive—that’s a fact
From the Fraser Institute
By Julio Mejía and Elmira Aliakbari
As a new year dawns and winter takes hold, it’s worth considering the cost of energy. After a meeting in Italy last spring, the G7 countries (including Canada) pledged to triple renewable energy sources (e.g. wind, solar) globally to ensure an “affordable” energy future. But while direct costs for wind and solar are dropping, they remain expensive due in part to the backup energy sources required when renewables are not available.
In short, an “affordable” energy future is incompatible with increased reliance on renewables. Here’s why.
Wind and solar energy are intermittent, meaning they aren’t consistently available, so we need an alternative power source when there’s no sunlight or wind given the current limited ability to store energy from solar and wind. So we must maintain enough energy capacity in a parallel system, typically powered by natural gas. Constructing and upkeeping a secondary energy source results in higher overall energy costs because two energy systems cost more than one. Therefore, when evaluating the costs of renewables, we must consider the costs of backup energy.
Often, when proponents claim that wind and solar sources are cheaper than fossil fuels, they ignore these costs. A recent study published in Energy, a peer-reviewed energy and engineering journal, found that—after accounting for backup, energy storage and associated indirect costs—solar power costs skyrocket from US$36 per megawatt hour (MWh) to as high as US$1,548 and wind generation costs increase from US$40 to up to US$504 per MWh.
Which is why when governments phase out fossil fuels to expand the role of renewable sources in the electricity grid, electricity become more expensive. In fact, a study by University of Chicago economists showed that between 1990 and 2015, U.S. states that mandated minimum renewable power sources experienced significant electricity price increases after accounting for backup infrastructure and other costs. Specifically, in those states electricity prices increased by an average of 11 per cent, costing consumers an additional $30 billion annually. The study also found that electricity prices grew more expensive over time, and by the twelfth year, electricity prices were 17 per cent higher (on average).
Europe is another case in point. Between 2006 and 2019, solar and wind sources went from representing around 5 per cent of Germany’s electricity generation to almost 30 per cent in 2019. During that same period, German households experienced an increase in electricity prices from 19.46 cents to 30.46 cents per kilowatt hour—a rise of more than 56 per cent. This surge in prices occurred before the war in Ukraine, which led to an unprecedented price spike in 2022.
For Canada, the outlook is also dire. In a recent report, TD Bank estimated that replacing existing gas generators with renewables (such as solar and wind) in Ontario could increase average electricity costs by 20 per cent by 2035 compared to 2021. In Alberta, electricity prices would increase by up to 66 per cent by 2035 compared to an scenario without changes. These increases are on top of the 15 to 20 per cent increase in average generation costs expected by 2035 under current government policies.
Clearly, when accounting for backup costs, renewable-powered electricity is more expensive than fossil fuels. Policymakers in Ottawa and across Canada must recognize that integrating renewables into electricity grids can lead to significant price increases for consumers, and they should be honest about that fact with Canadians in 2025 and beyond.
Business
Taxpocalypse 2025: Trudeau Rings in the New Year with Higher Taxes and Empty Wallets
Taxpayer Federation’s report reveals how Trudeau’s government is using new taxes to crush the middle class, fund wasteful projects, and expand a bloated bureaucracy while Canadians struggle
When the clock strikes midnight, it won’t just be the start of 2025—it’ll mark the beginning of Taxpocalypse 2025, a year where Justin Trudeau’s government will hit the middle class harder than ever before.
The Canadian Taxpayers Federation has released a report that lays bare the financial storm Canadians are about to endure. It’s not just inflation draining your wallet; it’s an avalanche of new taxes designed to fund Trudeau’s bloated government and its endless corruption. Let’s go through the numbers, because you deserve to know what’s really happening.
First, payroll taxes are going up. If you earn $81,200 or more, you’ll be paying $403 more in Canada Pension Plan and Employment Insurance contributions this year. Your employer will also fork out nearly $6,000 per employee. Small businesses—already struggling with inflation and high costs—are being crushed under this weight. This isn’t job creation; it’s job destruction.
Then there’s the carbon tax. Starting tomorrow, it jumps from $80 per tonne to $95, adding 20.9¢ per litre to the cost of gasoline. Filling up a 70-litre tank will now cost you almost $15 in carbon taxes alone. If you heat your home with natural gas, get ready to pay an additional $415 this year. Trudeau claims this is about fighting climate change, but in reality, it’s just another excuse to fill government coffers.
And if you thought inflation was bad, bracket creep makes it worse. As your income grows slightly due to inflation, you’re pushed into higher tax brackets without actually having more buying power. So, you’ll pay more in income tax on money that doesn’t go as far as it did last year. Meanwhile, the wealthy use loopholes to avoid taxes, and the poor get targeted rebates. Once again, it’s the middle class holding the bag.
Don’t believe me about how bad things have gotten under Trudeau? Let’s talk inflation—specifically food inflation. Here are the year-over-year increases:
- 2021: 4.0% (September)
- 2022: 11.0% (October)
- 2023: 8.3% (June)
- 2024: 2.7% (October)
Now, let’s compound that year over year. Since 2021, food prices have soared 28.37%. Think about that—almost a third of your grocery budget wiped out. A dollar that used to buy a loaf of bread now barely buys three-quarters of one. And this year, Trudeau’s new taxes will take even more out of your wallet.
But while you’re paying more for less, Trudeau has been busy inflating something else: the federal public service. Since he took office in 2015, he has added 108,793 new public servants to the federal payroll—a 42% increase in the size of the federal public service. And for what? Are hospitals better staffed? Are services more efficient? Absolutely not. Wait times for healthcare are worse than ever. Infrastructure projects are endlessly delayed.
I’m an independent Canadian journalist exposing corruption, delivering unfiltered truths and untold stories. Join me on Substack for fearless reporting that goes beyond headlines
If you ask me, Trudeau bloated the public sector to artificially keep unemployment numbers down. Let’s be clear: it’s the private sector that provides for the public sector, not the other way around. Every new bureaucrat added to the payroll is funded by taxes from hardworking Canadians—people like you—who are already struggling to make ends meet.
So, under Trudeau, you’re paying more for groceries, more in taxes, and getting less in return. This isn’t governance; it’s theft. But here’s the real insult: all of this money is going to fund Trudeau’s swamp of waste and corruption. Take the ArriveCAN app, a disaster that cost $54 million—for what? A glorified QR code. Contracts were handed out to insiders, many of whom didn’t even do any work.
Then there’s the Green Slush Fund, which has wasted nearly $400 million on pet projects rife with conflicts of interest. Liberal insiders funneled taxpayer money into their own businesses, and Trudeau’s government just shrugged.
The alcohol escalator tax is going up too, adding 2% more to the already sky-high taxes on beer, wine, and spirits. And don’t forget the digital services tax, a 3% levy on platforms like Amazon and Netflix. Experts say most of this cost will be passed directly to consumers.
Final Thoughts
This is Justin Trudeau’s Canada: a nation where the poor are shielded, the rich find their loopholes, and the middle class—the backbone of this country—is bled dry. Payroll taxes, carbon taxes, alcohol taxes, income taxes—it’s all part of an elaborate scheme to fund the bloated vanity projects and corruption of a government that no longer even pretends to care about the people footing the bill.
And while Canadians are working longer hours to afford less, struggling to put food on their tables, start families, or even dream of owning a home, Trudeau jet-sets around the world like royalty. Whether it’s sipping top-shelf wine at a global summit or skiing the pristine slopes of Red Mountain, this guy lives like a king while the rest of you pick up the tab.
It’s no wonder Canadians are booing him in public—it’s not only justified, it’s well deserved. He’s earned every jeer, every shout of frustration, because his leadership has failed this country at every turn. Under Trudeau, affordability has become a joke, and hard work no longer guarantees success.
But here’s the best part, Justin: there’s an election this year. Canadians finally get the chance to tell you exactly what they think of your disastrous leadership. They’ll send your Liberal ship straight into the iceberg, where it belongs.
So, go ahead, call the election. Take the globalist agenda you’ve been so proud to champion, pack it up with your carbon-tax hypocrisy, and prepare for your next gig as a keynote speaker for the World Economic Forum. You’ve proven you’re great at reading from a script that someone else writes—just not at running a country.
Enjoy your top sirloin tonight, Justin. Canadians? They’ll be eating Kraft Dinner while watching your government fall apart. Happy New Year. And Canada, don’t forget: Taxpocalypse 2025 starts tomorrow. Let’s make it the year we take our country back.
Invite your friends and earn rewards
-
Brownstone Institute17 hours ago
Read Between the Lies: A Pattern Recognition Guide
-
Business11 hours ago
Solar and wind power make electricity more expensive—that’s a fact
-
Crime10 hours ago
Police thank Elon Musk for help in investigating Cybertruck attack at Trump Hotel
-
Crime1 day ago
Woman Allegedly Burned Alive On Train By Illegal Migrant Finally Identified
-
International1 day ago
U.S. Supreme Court to rule on major cases in 2025
-
International1 day ago
FBI identifies Texas man as Bourbon Street attacker
-
Frontier Centre for Public Policy10 hours ago
Canada’s Leadership Vacuum Fueling a National Crisis
-
Education9 hours ago
Parents should oppose any plans to replace the ABCs with vague terminology in schools