
Make UT Great Again (MUGA)
By Daniel Acosta, Jr. / The Rag Blog / December 10, 2025
The University of Texas is facing an existential crisis because of its decision to appease the Texas governor and legislature by providing a more ideologically diverse curriculum to UT’s current programs. According to UT’s Provost, “our university leadership is having constructive behind-the-scenes discussions with the White House on the Trump Compact.” He further says that UT “aligns with the principles of conduct that they (the White House) want” (see the October 28th Chronicle of Higher Education interview of Provost William Inboden).
Certain UT colleges have been targeted for restructuring to bring their curricula more in line with what the President and Provost want the colleges to offer the students (i.e., a more optimally structured academic mission). The Provost states that “we will in time be announcing reforms and restructurings in the College of Liberal Arts, the College of Natural Sciences and others.” His plea to everyone on campus is: “Wait until we have something announced, and then we have that discussion.”
And so it goes. Cryptic messages to the public and the faculty on how UT will become great again with limited debate with those people most involved in higher education on campus — the faculty and students. Of course, an ideologically diverse curriculum is not the same as promoting a faculty and student body that are culturally and racially diverse. That is not allowed in the great state of Texas.
I returned to Austin in 2019 to spend my retirement years with my family. Although UT has had three different presidents in the last six years, UT still remains one of the best public universities (see the 2026 U.S. News & World Report). so why do the UT president and provost proclaim that our great state university “has lost its way” and needs to regain the public’s trust? Is “Make UT Great Again” the new slogan for this new UT administration, instead of the current one — “What Starts Here Changes The World?
Fifty years ago I was the second Mexican-American PhD professor on the pharmacy faculty since the founding of the College in 1893. Today there is only one Chicano professor. The number of Black and Hispanic tenured faculty at UT is embarrassingly low, compared to the other top 10 public universities.
The Presidential leadership team of VPs and deputies consists of seven white men and six white women. Out of the 15 active deans of colleges (plus three interim deans who are not included) there are seven white men, four white women, two Hispanic men, one Hispanic woman, and one Asian woman. Diversity has never played a role in the leadership of the University of Texas for over 170 years. So why is everyone now complaining that DEI had lowered the quality of education and research at UT?
I left UT after 20 years as a tenured professor and director of the toxicology training program because I was told I wasn’t suited for a higher administration position. I finished my career as the dean of pharmacy at the University of Cincinnati Medical Center and later as the Deputy Director for FDA’s major research center — The National Center for Toxicological Research.
My wife and I helped fund a graduate student endowment in pharmacology and toxicology at the College of Pharmacy to assist students attend scientific conferences. I reached out to the new dean of pharmacy to establish an endowment to attract more Hispanic faculty to the college. But my efforts to improve the diversity of faculty and students at the college have been blunted by state regulations which hamper attempts to add more diverse and well-qualified individuals to the faculty.
[Acosta is retired and lives in Austin. He’s Dean Emeritus of Pharmacy at the University of Cincinnati Medical Center and former Deputy Director of FDA’s National Center for Toxicological Research.]





































MICHAEL MEEROPOL /ย COMMENTARYย / Sleeping Giant: Thoughts on the results of the November 4 elections
Image from Pix4Free.org.
By Michael Meeropol / The Rag Blog / November 18, 2025
The following is an expanded version of a commentary delivered over WAMC-FM on November 7, 2025, by Michael Meeropol, Professor Emeritus of Economics at Western New England University. It has been edited forย The Rag Blog.ย Meeropol and Alice Embree will be featured on Thorne Dreyerโs Rag Radio program on KOOP 91.7-FM in Austin and streamed at KOOP.org, Friday, Nov. 21, at 2 p.m. to discuss this article and larger issues it raises.
I stayed up to watch the election results and was rewarded with evidence that the โsleeping giantโ — the American people — had finally awakened to the danger that Trump and Trumpism poses to our society. Yes, I saw the exit polls. Most people claimed to be voting in favor of the candidate they voted for, not โagainstโ anyone. Yes, in two of the three major elections, the governorships of Virginia and New Jersey were won by so-called โmoderatesโ — two โnational security women.โ (Governorโelect Spanberger of Virginia served in the CIA before getting into politics. Governor-elect Sherrill of New Jersey is a former Navy helicopter pilot who had graduated from the US Naval Academy.)
But I believe despite what voters told pollsters, there was an underlying goal for many of the people who came out to vote — and that was to โvote against Trump.โ The candidates running did not have to say it — the people answering pollsters did not want to say it. But I believe that, for example, the people standing in line for hours in California to pass a ballot measure that they were very confident would pass without their votes — when there was no one on the ballot! — were there to make a statement against Trump and as one person told a reporter, voted โin defense of my freedom.โ
Meanwhile, the election of a Democratic socialist in New York City who brought out a hundred thousand young people who had never voted and probably wouldnโt have voted if he hadnโt been in the race has been considered an anomaly. And this attempt to dismiss his victory as something totally impossible to replicate anywhere else has occurred despite the fact that he had to battle unbelievably strong headwinds. Once he won the primary, literally millions of dollars were spent by billionaires attempting to smear him as badly as any red baiters did in the McCarthy era.
The fact that Trump routinely called him a communist means almost nothing. But the attempts to smear him as a radical Muslim โ even hinting he would have celebrated 9-11 — did produce a fear in too many Jewish New Yorkers that the city would no longer be safe for them should he win. And this, of course, was despite the fact that he won the vote of young Jews. Meanwhile, his campaign was focused like a laser on economic issues — which also had pride of place in the two gubernatorial campaigns.
And to return to the Virginia campaign, the Republican candidate for governor spent a tremendous amount of money running ads attacking trans kids in sports and bathrooms. According to a Substack entitled Erin in the Morning [Check out โA Stunning Rebuke Of Anti-Trans PoliticsโโDems Win Elections Nationwide Despite Anti-Trans Ads.]
โAccording to MSNBC, more than 57 percent of Republican ad spending in the Virginia governorโs race went toward anti-transgender messaging, an effort to revive what the party saw as a winning wedge issue in 2024. But a year later, with prices still high and anti-trans rhetoric solving none of votersโ real problems, the strategy appeared to backfire. Voters seemed tired of the culture wars and frustrated that Republicans remained fixated on scapegoating instead of governing.โ
Both Democratic candidates for governor stressed economic issues in their campaigns — just as did Mamdani. Meanwhile, in Pennsylvania, three judges on the State Supreme Court were up for their 10-year โre-electionโ where the vote was Yes (keep them for another 10 years) or No (send them off the bench). A very clever set of ads made it seem that voting โnoโ was a way of protecting the integrity of voting in Pennsylvania. In fact, knocking off these three judges would have created a right-wing majority which would have been ready to rule in favor of whatever ridiculous challenge Republicans would mount to steal the 2026 and/or 2028 elections. All three campaigns went down to ignominious defeat.
And in California as I already mentioned, people waited in line for over an hour to vote for an idea, Proposition 50, which changed the State Constitution giving the Governor and State Legislature the power to increase the number of Democratic majority districts in California by five — matching exactly what the state of Texas did at Trumpโs bidding — adding five Republican seats.
What does this mean? I saw one poll out of hundreds that tells it all. Thirty percent of the population told pollsters they identified as MAGA — that is the Trumpified Republican Party — the people who waved signs at the Republican Convention calling for mass deportation — the people who have rushed to join the newly militarized ICE so they can snatch people with brown skin off the streets without warrants or accountability].
Guess what? The same poll asked how many people identified with the No Kings protests. That number was 43 percent. Given that the No Kings movement has no national leadership — no nationally known face of the leadership — no agreed upon principles beyond defending American democracy against Donald Trump and his fascists and has gotten very slight coverage from lots of the national media — that number is remarkable.
[For details see https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/poll-shows-no-kings-protest-movement-topping-maga-public-support-rcna241803
It is particularly remarkable because the Speaker of the House was all over national television calling the No Kings rallies โhate Americaโ events and attacking the participants as Hamas supporters, terrorists, supporters of political violence and communists. (Not sure I got all his epithets but people can look it up!). The attack lines of Trump and his Trumpists did not work for that 43 percent and I consider that remarkable as well.
I am convinced that the reason the elections were blowouts is because the energy generated by the giant crowds at the No Kings Day protests carried over to election day. So many people at these rallies asked each other and the speakers what can we do? It is easy to give money. It is (relatively) easy to write a letter to an editor. It is harder to take a drive and stand in a crowd for a few hours with a sign. It is much harder to knock on doors for your preferred candidate. Yet thousands of people — in New York thousands of young people — did just that for the New York Mayoral candidate who Trump called a communist as well as for the two Democrats in Virginia and New Jersey. And in California, people waited in line for over an hour for an idea — proposition 50 — in California.
America is back. But — now is not the time to rest on our laurels. These blowout elections are validation of all the work thatโs been done exposing the atrocities of the Trump Administration and making sure at least the majority of the public sees through the administrationโs lies. But it is almost a full year to the 2026 midterms. A lot can happen in that time. It is essential that the people keep coming out to demonstrations and rallying around support for our immigrant neighbors targeted by ICE.
More importantly, lawyers, officials, etc., have to prepare to fight Trumpโs and the Republicansโ attempts to steal the 2026 election. We know they are planning to do that — only massive voter turnouts and massive vote margins will stop them — as will courts like the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.
The people have demonstrated they understand the threats to our democracy posed by Trump and his enablers — we just have to keep it up for at least the next year.