Schwarzenegger's budget cuts would be an unmitigated disaster for California's public universities

from the Nation:



California's Higher Education Crisis
Under the Barbarian
By Laila Lalami

June 12, 2009


In fall 2003, when Arnold Schwarzenegger was running for governor of California, he famously told Fox News, "The first thing that you have to do is not worry about should we cut the programs or raise the taxes and all those things." He did, in fact, appear to worry about these things a great deal, though he seemed consistently to reach the wrong conclusions. Schwarzenegger's first act in office was to repeal an unpopular but highly effective vehicle-licensing fee, which would have generated $4.2 billion a year and would have helped to close the $8 billion deficit the state was facing. Because of California's Proposition 13, which requires a two-thirds majority in both legislative houses for any increases in tax rates, the state had very few easy options for increasing its revenue. Now, after five years of Schwarzenegger's leadership, the deficit has ballooned to $24 billion.

Schwarzenegger's monumental failure, along with voters' recent defeat of ballot measures that would have raised taxes and capped spending, add up to one thing: California faces the prospect of extremely drastic budget cuts. These include eliminating healthcare for poor children, releasing nonviolent offenders from prison one year early, closing all state parks, selling famous landmarks such as the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum and euthanizing animals after only three days in shelters. But perhaps the most foolish of all the proposals under consideration is the $800 million cut from the budget of the state's public universities.

The University of California system includes five of the top twenty public universities in the country; its distinguished faculty have collectively received more Nobel Prizes than any other; and its alumni include some of the brightest innovators, scientists and artists in America. The computer you may be using at this moment was created by a UC alumnus--Apple's Steve Wozniak. It probably contains a processor made by another former UC student--Intel's Gordon Moore. The virus that causes AIDS was first identified at a UC school, and UC physicians were the first to perform surgery on a baby still in its mother's womb. That prizewinning book on your night stand? You can thank the California university system for it, too. Maxine Hong Kingston, Joan Didion and Michael Chabon are all former students.

It would probably not be an exaggeration to say that the University of California improves, in one way or another, the life of every person in the state. ...........(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.thenation.com/doc/20090629/lalami

With that twinge of regret that he did not accomplish this.

In fact a lot of the responsibility lies with the California public, first for passing Prop. 13, then for failing to repeal it, even in the face of overwhelming evidence that Prop. 13 was destroying their state. Even now, there is no public outcry against Prop. 13 or any sort of movement to repeal it. Even if you recalled Arnie, the underlying problems caused by Prop. 13 would remain, dragging the state down.

There is no public outcry or popular movement for ANYTHING. All popular ballot propositions are paid for by wealthy special interests. See the recall election, Prop 8, etc. The CA proposition system only gives the illusion of populist democracy. But it's easier to blame Californians than to recognize that the state has been held hostage by a far right minority. Because out of state liberals might actually feel some responsibility to help us out rather than continuing to shit on us.

but not all of them are repukes or right wing. It seems to be who can get the most media hype and commercials. There have been union victories in the process etc.

The last go round was clearly a backlash against entrenched pols. Be interesting to see if that holds true in the next round. Most voters seem to have a "throw the rascals out" mentality, but it does not apply to their local rep unless they have been caught with their hand in the cookie jar.

holders of commercial real estate start paying their fair share of taxes.

Nobody is "blaming the victims" CO. Go get a copy of "Paradise Lost" by Peter Shrag -- a very progressive and thoughtful former columnist -- who predicted what Prop. 13 would do to CA's economy.

Did Enron screw CAers? Yes. But they were a catalyst of this budget shortfull, not the cause.

California's tax base has been doomed since the passage of Proposition 13. As long as you continue to ignore the fact that commercial real estate owners are paying 1970s tax rates on trillions of dollars of property value that they bought for millions and can pass that on to their heirs without any increases, you cannot properly assess or comment on this matter.

And referendums on the ballot do not give the "illusion of populist democracy," they prove the failed reality of such a system. Ballot inititatives cannot pass if people don't vote for them. CAers have no one to blame but themselves.

and Gray Davis really needed to be thrown out.

Sickening.

Gray Davis had some very serious veracity issues that many of us were concerned about.

Both statements are facts. Would I like a Democrat as Governor, of course. Just because you have a (D) next to your name does not make you inerrant or immune from criticism here at DU or haven't you been reading the Obama threads?

Many of us never trusted him after that

Do you mean when he was State Controller?

And maybe you can give a hint as what you are refering to that made you distrust him so much.

I wasn't any huge fan of Davis, but recalls are for a certain purpose and CAers should have waited until the next election in this case if they wanted him out of office. That is what elections are for.

Exactly how was this fee highly effective? Did it get poor and working people off the road? Did it generate income from cars which didn't have current tags?

I'm sick of this. Citizen initiatives which order government to cut the taxes are orders to the government to cut the spending, not look for workarounds.

If they want to balance the budget of the university system, then they need to prioritize. Fully fund the school of education, and the technology schools (medicine, engineering, etc...) and then if there is anything left over the Basketweaving and Cosmic Studies departments can fight over it. Stop subsiding unproductive departments and stop requiring students to take classes they don't need to succeed in productive degree programs.

I'm also pretty sure they would then vote against the taxes to provide the funding.

The average fee paid under the proposal would have been $158.00.<http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2003/06/21/MN250030.DTL&type=printable>

Second, you've got to raise money in that state somehow, and since apparently the population is foolish enough to keep Prop. 13, then the only other method is to hike fees for government services. This all comes back to the fact that Californians shot their own selves in the foot by passing Prop. 13, and then refusing to repeal it, even in the face of a looming economic crisis. College education was free to California residents before Prop. 13, now it looks like it's going to be drastically cut or eliminated. Good job:eyes:

Third, stop with the anti-intellectual rant there. You're unfairly characterizing a slew of subjects with your crack about "basketweaving and cosmic studies." You may not like non-technological subject matter, but the fact of the matter is that all intellectual subjects are valuable. So stop coming across like an anti-intellectual freeper, OK.

Finally, instead of whining on an anonymous internet chat board, why don't you go out and do something, like repealing Prop. 13. Do that and your state will actually recover. Don't do that, and frankly you deserve everything that comes your way. The bad thing is that if California goes under due to thirty years of anti-tax stupidity, it's going to take the rest of the country with it. Gee, thanks.

Currently the VLF is set at 0.65 percent of the purchase price of the vehicle (65 cents per 100 dollars of the sale price). New legislation pushed through to combat California’s budget deficit will increase this fee to 1.15 percent, or $1.15 per 100 dollars of the purchase price of the vehicle.

$220 to $440 would be the tax on a vehicle costing between $19K and $38K, also known as the price of a pick up truck. I said nothing about an average, so you complaint is that I didn't employ your statistical ruse. And it doesn't matter if he does "only pay" $158 that is still three times what I pay to register my truck in Florida. Would you like to know how much state tuition is in Florida? I can tell you, because I am paying it off as we speak IN ADVANCE.

Second, you've got to raise money in that state somehow,

No you don't. See there is the flaw to your reasoning. You don't go grocery shopping and then figure out how you are going to pay for the groceries- you figure out how much money you have and then buy that amount of groceries.

and since apparently the population is foolish enough to keep Prop. 13, then the only other method is to hike fees for government services. This all comes back to the fact that Californians shot their own selves in the foot by passing Prop. 13, and then refusing to repeal it, even in the face of a looming economic crisis. College education was free to California residents before Prop. 13, now it looks like it's going to be drastically cut or eliminated. Good job

Fees are taxes. If the public votes to lower taxes, then the government is supposed to lower spending, not pass new taxes and call them fees (or fines).

Third, stop with the anti-intellectual rant there. You're unfairly characterizing a slew of subjects with your crack about "basketweaving and cosmic studies." You may not like non-technological subject matter, but the fact of the matter is that all intellectual subjects are valuable. So stop coming across like an anti-intellectual freeper, OK.


First, I don't consider engineering and medicine to be anti-intellectual. So stop coming across like an asshole.

You know, the one to the SF Gate article stating that the average fee would be around $158.00. Tell you what, now that I've provided you a link showing that you're wrong, try backing up your assertions with something other than hot air.

Next off, stop trying to treat a state budget like a personal budget. With a house budget you don't have to deal with sudden increases in your household population, catastrophes, wild fires, etc. etc. that wreck your best estimates on a regular basis. Not to mention the fact that for thirty years now, things like infrastructure have been allowed to slide in California because anti-tax idiots didn't want to pay for infrastructure funding. So now it's gotten to a crisis point, and you either pay the tab or your state goes to hell.

Your fellow citizens of the state foolishly cut off their nose to spite their face when they passed Prop. 13, and you folks have been paying the price ever since. Where the hell is the state supposed to get the money if they don't charge fees? Pull it out their ass? Sorry, but the tax schedule under Prop. 13 simply wasn't sufficient to provide the basics for a state of that size, so they had to increase fees. When this didn't work well, in part because citizens of the state mandated both lower taxes and increased services (D'oh!), that's when your state started going broke. Sorry if you don't like the blunt assessment, but the fact of the matter is that collectively, the citizens of California have been pretty damn foolish over the past thirty years, even more so over the past ten years when the red lights were flashing about your budget problems, and not a damn thing was done. A state doesn't run on hot air, it needs revenue and when it doesn't have any, well, this is the mess you wind up with.

I realize that you don't consider engineering and medicine anti-intellectual, that's not what I was talking about. I'm talking about your broadbrush attack on subjects that are non-technological, you know, your crack about "basketweaving and cosmic studies". You seem to have a limited grasp of what is intellectual, what is suitable for higher studies, and your little rant on the subject did indeed make you come across like an anti-intellectual freeper. You don't like that, then stop making broad brush attacks on subject areas that don't meet with your approval.

Like I said earlier, the sad part about this is that the rest of the country is going to have to also pay the price for your anti-tax stupidity. Congratulations

The California car tax is and was very unpopular. Its a separate check that had to be written every year and can be higher than the other very unpopular payment, auto insurance. No politicians really wants to go there. Some are using the blame game and finger pointing over it, but pushing it will used against them in the next election. The only real shot it has is to get legislators who are terming out (we also have term limits) to band together to push it through

You sure sound like one.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=5840545&mesg_id=5841608

"May 2009"

And the reason fee increases are proposed that do impact the general public is because the Repubs in the Leg will not vote to cut corporate tax loopholes and enact other revenue measures that have a more proportionate impact. In fact, although the state faced billion dollar deficits, the Legislature enacted more tax cuts for corporations, further decreasing state revenues. (Those measures the Repubs were willing to support.) Voters didn't get a chance to say whether or not they wanted to give billions of dollars in tax cuts to already wealthy corporations.

The CA Budget deficit is the Repubs' fiscal 9/11, an opportunity to remake the state as they want it to be. Some of the measures being taken and proposed do not even involve or address the General Fund deficit, but they play well to the public who generally know squat about state mandates, expenditures, funding sources and revenue.

Rather than do the responsible thing--increasing revenues through tax measures that do not disproportionately impact lower to middle income folks---which would interfere with Republican ideology, for years the Legislature and Governor have been borrowing and playing shell games with funding. They've adopted short term patches, not solutions. The measures on the ballot were more shell games, more borrowing.

Schwarzenegger ran against Davis in part based on the automobile reg fee increase, based on your comments here it sounds like you would have voted for him and other Repubs. Arnie made a big show of reducing the fee when he became Gov...and then raised it again later. By the way, the vehicle license reg fee is in effect now through at least 2011. The Legislature chose to make it temporary but does not need to go to the ballot to increase vehicle license fees.

Grover Norquist must be proud. At a time when programs for the poor and disadvantaged are cut (putting welfare recipients to work is not a good idea?) the state Legislature passed tax cuts for wealthy corporations that amounts to billions of dollars in reduced state revenue. http://www.mercurynews.com/breakingnews/ci_12511192

http://www.california-lemon-law-blog.com/2009/05/ca_vehicle_license_fees_set_to.html

They concern the hike under Schwarzenegger, not the hike Davis proposed.

I've been back in CA for some time and would hate to think I missed it. Here in CA people vote for mandates in propositions but not the funding/funding cuts. The Gann initiative does not get the press that Prop 13 does, but it is in many ways a bigger problem. Its nuts but that is the way it is here.

As for your defense of non-technical academic fields, while I have some sympathy as an active professor, clearly not all fields are created equal or are of equal value in society and the job market. If some have to go or be merged, so be it. Many of us felt the explosive growth in some was ill conceived at the time. Alternatively specialty campuses or schools might be a way to preserve them. I am not claiming they are of no value but that it is reasonable that they are the first ones to go.

Net taxes on an individual in CA are not all that low. Alabama this place is not. Its as much a case of where and how as the amount. Something else to consider.

Funny before California went Tax cranky they were one of the best states for education.

However then you have capital flight to deal with.

for my car license in CA.

Arnold is the pits IMO and CA props are the pits as well.

I would be willing to pay whatever as long as I can still live in CA.

At some point you visit Florida and you realize how warm and calm the Gulf of Mexico is, and that you can actually swim in it! And then you check the almanac, and find out that the Gulf is warmer than the Pacific year 'round. And then you see a for sale sign, and you realize what your housing outlay in California would get you in Florida. Oh, but oh, and then someone points out that there is no state income tax in Florida, and now your brain is buzzing trying to figure out how far your salary would go in Florida. And then your mother says, "I told you, but no you had to go and live in California. You think that house is cheap? You could have bought it in 1985 for..."

Likewise they have their own medical facilities, security forces, etc.

They could not care less what happens to the larger world.

...as the rest of the Nation.

The number of quarters of teaching assistantships for grad students is up in the air; the department may no longer be able to support students beyond three years, which is not enough time to earn a PhD even in ideal situations. When students complete their PhDs, they used to be able to rely upon the department to hire them as lecturers for two years if they didn't get a job on the academic market, which is now in the dumper. No longer. The department starts job searches and then has to abandon them because the school lacks the funding for the hiring. Students have larger classes, fewer class options, and higher fees. And we are one of the largest and most successful departments on campus!

The whole situation is a nightmare.

That's a world famous school there.

As it stands now, UC is looking at very deep cuts. What came out of that discussion is that the long term solution, more than likely, is that UC (as a whole -- not just Berkeley) will transition from a State School model to that of a State-Supported Private University. My understanding is that this is the model currently used by UVA.

To make this work, UC Alums will be called upon to provide much more in the way of contributions and endowments. Student costs would rise dramatically. State participation would drop to something like 10-20% of costs.

And what happens to the lower guys on the totem pole? Like the Cal States?

What would be certain is that the UC schools would become considerably more expensive and, more than likely, less diverse.

The Cal State schools and the JuCos will likely have to raise fees and cut many class offerings.

We're getting nearly constant updates as the situation continues to worsen. The last I heard is that my campus will need to cut nearly 20 percent from its budget next academic year-- and this is after five or six years of steady cutting already. We've already lost about a third of our faculty and staff in my department-- which is one of the largest on campus-- mainly due to positions not being filled when colleagues leave or retire. We have ZERO operating budget for running classes, lab materials, etc. We're totally dependent on charging students additional fees for materials now-- but that means they get a substantial say in how those fees are spent, so we have to seek student approval for purchases. That creates some ludicrous situations-- I've had classes where the lab fee committee approves purchasing reagent X but not reagent Y, so that X is next to useless anyway and the whole exercise simply falls apart. And that's the BRIGHT SPOT in the budget debacle.

It's starting to feel like a third world university.

Had no idea it was this bad.

I seem to be OK for now, but that could change. I am by choice non-tenure track.

I work in administration at UC Berkeley. All our staff meetings for the last few months are about what's going on with the decisions being made about voluntary furloughs and early retirements and salary and job freezes. Everyone expects cuts in staff even though most departments are down to skeleton staff. I work in the department of Statistics and the Berkeley Natural History Museums which does the administrative work for 8 small research and museum departments. The work load is brutal.

I am so glad we left California in 1988.

Too many self-righteous, self-preoccupied and greedy Republicans. I hope they are all proud of themselves.

May be a lot more difficult to get accepted for a PhD program now.

Some departments are becoming even more selective so they can continue to fund all the students, but the funding guarantees might be more strict--if the university says it will fund you for nine quarters or 6 semesters, that's what they mean. And some departments are moving toward a two-tiered system: they accept some students fully funded and some have to pay for the first year. The good news is that Graduate Division at my campus encourages departments to continue to accept people at pre-insanity levels, but that is largely a function of the fact that administrators love to have more grad students because it gives them more power.

UCLA, Berkeley, and San Diego. They all have some of the top poly sci programs in the country. I suppose I could deal with paying for one year. But beyond that is problematic. It takes 5 years (on average) to get a PhD in that discipline and that's 5 years you're not working.

It's the graduate students who the universities rely on for their research work. Every famous Professor who ever discovered or developed anything did it through the work of their graduate students. I say go for it and apply to every university you want to to go to. What's the worst that can happen?

I'm just saying that it's unfortunate because the California schools have some great programs in my field and now there's a possibility that I will have less of a chance of getting in or getting decent funding.

Reagan's governorship. I can't believe it's been going on this long. I was a young woman then. Now I'm almost seventy and the train wreck still hasn't come to a halt.