Intellectual diversity.

That's the catchphrase in a General Assembly bill designed to measure political thought at Virginia's public colleges.

Supporters of the bill see it as a way to ensure freedom of thought among students, faculty and campus speakers.

Opponents just want to know what it really means.

The legislation -- House Bill 1643 -- is scheduled for discussion tonight in the House of Delegates higher education subcommittee. Del. Steve Landes, R-Augusta County, has proposed the legislation, which would require public colleges in the state to submit annual reports to the State Council of Higher Education for Virginia.

The reports to SCHEV would explain how each university is ensuring "intellectual diversity" through such measures as "policies that protect individuals against political viewpoint discrimination and track any reported grievances."

Richard Rich, a political science professor at Virginia Tech, said the law is vague and could invite arbitrary enforcement that would actually inhibit free expression.

Virginia Tech spokesman Larry Hincker described the bill and its origins as confusing and perplexing.

"What's the source of this?" he said. "I don't know anyone in the world who could define intellectual diversity."

Landes agrees that the terminology is somewhat difficult to define, but he's willing to amend some of the language to get to what he sees as a pretty straightforward goal -- setting standards of academic freedom and expression.

Landes said he isn't proposing it in reaction to any problems he sees at Virginia's universities. He just hopes his bill will be a "starting point" for a discussion about how different viewpoints are presented in higher education and simply wants to gather information. It doesn't mandate universities to take any specific actions to address the issue on campus; it only asks that colleges report what they are doing, he said.

But Hincker is wary of what the bill suggests by requiring colleges to enumerate how they ensure the free exchange of ideas on campus.

The bill is based on model legislation from the American Legislative Exchange Council, a membership association of conservative lawmakers. Similar legislation is also being considered in Missouri and Montana.

Matt Warner, education task force director for ALEC, said that generally speaking, some conservative viewpoints are not well-received in classrooms. But that doesn't mean those are the only viewpoints protected by the legislation.

"The idea behind the bill is to create an atmosphere that -- regardless of what the faculty composition happens to be -- that there isn't an environment of hostility toward any ideas," he said.

Landes said he was aware of problems in other states, though he couldn't name any specifics.

One instance cited by supporters occurred at Columbia University in October when the founder of the anti-illegal immigration Minutemen Project cut short a speech after students from a campus club climbed onstage with banners denouncing his group. The bill includes a sentence about universities establishing campus policies about hecklers preventing speakers from speaking.

Several higher education officials did not respond or declined comment on the issue, including provosts at Virginia Tech and Radford University and the head of Radford University's faculty senate. RU spokesman Rob Tucker also said university President Penelope Kyle would not comment on the legislation. University of Virginia spokesman Jeff Hanna said it's university policy not to comment on pending legislation.

SCHEV spokeswoman Kirsten Nelson said the legislation has raised some concerns among faculty but there "has not been a barrage of formal complaints, whatsoever."

Kerry Redican, president of the faculty senate at Virginia Tech, said he opposes the bill. The idea that there are problems with intellectual diversity on campuses is more perceived than real, he said.

The bill's language resembles David Horowitz's "Academic Bill of Rights," published by the conservative activist to eliminate perceived political bias and indoctrination of students by radicals in academe. Horowitz made news last year when his book "The Professors: The 101 Most Dangerous Academics in America" named specific professors whom he sees as perpetrators of this.

Landes sees no problem with there being similarities between his bill and the work of a divisive figure such as Horowitz.

"If there's something that we agree upon and we think is a good idea ... I think it's fine," he said.

Brian Turner, president of the Virginia Conference of the American Association of University Professors and a political science professor at Randolph-Macon College, has been discussing some of those compromises with Landes. He said the bill is not acceptable in its current form and could set a dangerous and confusing precedent.

"The provision, first of all, calls for the state government to be counting events and potentially even counting faculty members by the political and ideological positions they presumably hold," he said. "When I'm teaching or speaking I may cover viewpoints that cover a whole range of opinion."

Turner pointed out the AAUP has a statement on student rights that encourages free student expression. He doesn't think his students have any problem with that.

"If I'm an indoctrinator, I'm pretty poor at it," he said. "My students don't take anything I say very willingly. ... It's their job to challenge me and my job to challenge them."

Staff writer Albert Raboteau contributed to this report.