By Chancellor Charles B. Reed
During the budget debate, it became clear to me that something unthinkable has happened in California: Our fiscal meltdown has so distorted our legislative priorities that we are now a state that places a higher priority on prison than on higher education.
Last week, at the same time that the California State University’s Board of Trustees was approving drastic measures to manage unprecedented budget cuts, a tentative budget deal in the Legislature was unraveling because of outrage over cuts to California’s prison budget. How could the message to California students have been any clearer? You can cut higher education to the bone and you won’t hear a single statement of remorse from the Legislature, but start cutting into the prison budget and you’ll hear howls of protest from the Capitol.
During the budget debate, it became clear to me that something unthinkable has happened in California: Our fiscal meltdown has so distorted our legislative priorities that we are now a state that places a higher priority on prison than on higher education.
Let’s put the budget cuts in perspective: Thanks to the state’s $26.3 billion deficit, the California State University is anticipating a $584 million revenue shortfall for 2009-10. Overall, state general fund support of the CSU is expected to be approximately $1.6 billion, or about $600 million less than the level of state support provided a decade ago. But the CSU – the country’s largest four-year university system – has about 100,000 more students than it did 10 years ago.
The CSU’s plan to address the funding deficit includes employee furloughs and reduction in workforce, a 20 percent student fee increase, and other cost-cutting measures across the system. Additionally – and most regrettably – the CSU must now plan to reduce its enrollment by 40,000 students systemwide for 2010-2011.
The idea of turning away students is anathema to those of us who revere California’s Master Plan for Higher Education and its once-proud tradition of accessible, quality higher education for all. It is a sign to me that California has completely reneged on its promise of opportunity to its people.
On the flip side, consider that California’s prisons set the state back more than $10 billion per year. The proposed plan to release 27,000 prisoners would move to home detention those prisoners with a year left on their sentences, as well as the elderly and infirm, and change sentencing and parole rules for inmates who show promise of rehabilitation. But inconceivably, for some policy leaders in Sacramento, the idea of setting those people free is more unthinkable than denying 40,000 students the right to higher education.
Now for the final injustice: It costs $49,000 per year to keep a prisoner behind bars in California. However, the state’s contribution per student at the CSU is just $4,600. This dichotomy is not just outrageous, it’s tragic. For such a relatively small amount of money, a young person could get a good education, secure a meaningful job and become a contributing member to the community and the economy. But instead of preserving this small investment in our young people, our leaders would rather spend 10 times as much to keep prisoners behind bars.
What kind of society are we if we allow these bright young minds to grow idle? Under this scenario, California will be better prepared to house today’s young people as prisoners than grant them diplomas. We’re paying the price now, and we’ll continue to pay the price in the future, as we watch our communities, our economy and our children suffer as a result. Now there’s the real outrage.
Charles B. Reed is chancellor of the 23-campus California State University system.
Related link: FresnoStateNews Budget Central
