|
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.
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.
|
