According to California’s Legislative Analyst’s Office, a constitutional amendment proposed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger that would require the state to spend more on its universities than its prisons is both unwise and unnecessary. In a report released today, the nonpartisan office urged the Legislature to reject the proposal, which would require approval from both lawmakers and voters. The University of California issued a response disagreeing with the report and expressing disappointment in its suggestion that universities could raise fees to offset losses in state support.
RSS
Follow The Ticker through your favorite RSS reader.
2 Responses to California Analyst Advises Against Governor’s ‘Prisons vs. Universities’ Proposal
tridaddy - January 27, 2010 at 9:24 am
As much as one might believe in this approach, I don’t think many state gov’ts could afford it. Maybe we should actually do something to prevent individuals from going to prison in the first place, then it might be possible to actually fund education at a reasonable level.
cwinton - January 27, 2010 at 12:34 pm
A recent NPR article on the effect the bail bond lobby has had on promoting policy serving to increase the prison population pointed out one of the reasons we have seen such dramatic increases in spending for prisons. We also know that people who are successful in school are far, far less likely to run afoul of the law. Even though it costs incredibly less to educate than incarcerate, the Governor’s proposal doesn’t address that linkage in an appropriate way since it does not suggest that steps need to be taken to reduce spending on prisons. I have to concur that as presented his proposal is naive and unwise. On the other hand, it has garnered some needed attention to the fact we are spending entirely too much maintaining people in lockdown, many of whom could be out on their own recognizance while awaiting judicial review, or in an electronic monitoring program.