Gov. Gray Davis released May revisions to his budget plan for
next year Wednesday, calling for no more cuts to the University of
California. The UC can be happy about this in the same way a man
who has been knocked down, kicked, and punched can be happy when
the beating stops.
Though many are claiming the May Revise represents a return to
the prioritization of education, the UC still faces substantial
cuts in research, outreach and faculty pay. But worst of all, if
the budget passes as is, UC students will likely endure a 35
percent student fee increase next year. Given the dark scenario, it
is sad many UC officials at a meeting of the UC Board of Regents
embraced the revisions Wednesday, even as students chanted and beat
against the meeting room walls, protesting loudly against fee
increases.
The regents are indeed in a tough spot. Only they can raise
student fees, not the governor or legislature, but, despite the
“good” news of no further cuts, it appears the limited
funds the state will offer the UC will lead the regents to resort
to fee hikes.
Compared to his original proposal, Davis’ revised budget
does call for more tax increases on the wealthy and smaller cuts to
state programs, but he, and the rest of the state government, is
still falling far too short of doing what is best for
California’s long-term interests. Davis, and Republicans who
say even the tax increases he has offered are too large, argue that
filling the budget hole by raising taxes will stifle business.
But California’s sheer size ““ only a few countries
have larger economies than the state ““Â will keep
business here alive and well. Business leaders won’t leave
because of higher taxes. They might, though, if their employees
don’t have decent and affordable schools for their children.
Furthermore, how many future business and community leaders will we
lose if the state doesn’t invest in education now?
The state’s education system was once California’s
pride. Families from across the Midwest moved here because they
knew their children could attend high-quality and affordable
schools. While the state’s K-12 system has fallen behind, the
UC is still one of the best deals in higher education, despite
massive fee increases in the early 1990s.
The state government, led by Davis, doesn’t seem
interested in protecting that status, but luckily, for
students’ sake, the UC Board of Regents was designed to be as
independent of political influence as possible. That is why only it
can raise student fees.
Some regents seem to be on the right side of the issue. Regent
Ward Connerly and Regent Tom Sayles both expressed serious concerns
about the planned increases Wednesday. While it would be nice for
them to vote against an increase, it would be better if they could
keep it from happening by continuing to fight the state for more
funds right up until a budget passes.
If an anti-UC budget does pass, the small group against fee
increases must offer up an alternative plan with which a majority
of the board can agree. It would be a difficult task, since most of
the board seems to believe that fee increases themselves are not
the problem, but rather people’s reactions to fee increases.
Many regents indicated that protesting students Wednesday needed to
be better informed about why it was necessary to increase fees at
this stage ““ as though if students knew the truth, they would
accept hikes.
Such an attitude is insulting to the intelligence and dedication
of students. Students understand constructing a plan that does not
include fee increases would be difficult: Given the state’s
negligence, the UC is in a lose-lose situation. Cuts to
professors’ pay and the loss of important research could harm
the UC’s prestige.
But as UC Students Association Chairman Stephen Klass
articulated, students are not merely selfish in their opposition to
student fees. They are also organized behind an ideological view
““ that higher education should be as accessible as possible,
a view the architects of the modern UC shared.
Some regents believe students just don’t understand the
difficulty of the issue. But in this case it is not the students
who need a lesson about budget priorities, it is those officials
who would vote for a 35 percent fee increase, thereby threatening
affordability, perhaps the defining feature of what is, for now,
the most prestigious public university system in the world.