The Chronicle of Higher Education: Colloquy

Ronald Reagan, who died this month at the age of 93, was often at odds with higher education, both as governor of California and as president of the United States. The disputes concerned free speech, student aid, the culture wars, government secrecy, and other issues. But for many people in academe, Mr. Reagan was a polarizing figure for his actions outside the realm of higher education. For what will Mr. Reagan most be remembered in higher education? Are views of his legacy in academe unavoidably colored by the liberal views of most academics? Was he a great president, for higher education or otherwise?

This Democrat is not going defend the Reagan legacy, especially wityh regard to higher education.

But as a proud graduate of several of the UC campuses, I would pose a question to anyone with more recent and long-term experience at one of the nation's greatest public systems of higher education.

From a purely fiscal point of view, how would you compare the Reagan gubernatorial administrations with subsequent governors?

My memory, perhaps flawed, is that UC fought a life and death battle for support under Governor Jerry Brown that dwarfed any budget problems under Reagan.

Certainly, Regan's rise to prominence was based at least partly on his demagogic promise to put rabble rousers like me in line.

But I am not sure the rhetorical bashing was matched by the kind of comparable fiscal bashing that took place under Brown, Deukmejian, and Wilson.

Can someone come up with some facts?

Seems like your question is pretty biased and leading.

I started college in 1981 and felt the full financial effect of Reagan's higher education policies--cuts in Pell Grants, increasing reliance on GSL (now Federal Stafford Loan) funds, and more. I am a Democrat as well, and now I am the Director of Financial Aid at a small liberal arts college. Reagan's cuts in the Federal Pell Grant program are still being felt to this day; the cuts experienced in the 1980s set us back tremendously and the authorized vs. funded amounts are still highly discrepant. Federal loan fund availability has been expanded over the years while growth in the Federal Pell Grant program has stagnated overall.

Governor Reagan's attacks on the University of California system were a response to the turmoil of the 1960s that roiled campuses across the country. The firing of Clark Kerr, who was an able leader, probably did as much lasting damage to higher education in California than the Reagan budget cuts. Kerr had a deep understanding of the value of the three segments of public higher education in California to the overall economic success of the state.

By the end of Reagan's second term as governor higher education budgets actually had risen slightly although the U.C. system was shortchanged in comparison to the Cal State system and the community colleges. Under Gerry Brown public higher education in California suffered more than they did under Reagan. The reason for that can be traced back to Reagan's failure to reform the California tax system. The result was Proposition 13, which severely limited the resources that were available to K-12 education and to local governments. This, in turn, reduced the funds in the state budget that were available for higher education.

The situation never really improved much through a succession of Republican and Democratic governors.

I think it's good to see some of these issues in a larger context. Higher education (pro or con) was not one of the key elements of the Reagan administration. A growing economy, however, helps higher education and the people therein. I relocated at a time when Carter administration home mortgage rates were at 17%. That was not helpful to higher education, since it priced faculty out of certain housing markets and, hence, limited the opportunities for students to study with them.

At the present moment my still-employed colleagues are agonizing over the fact that federal policies are forcing them to reclassify certain employees and pay them on an hourly rather than annual basis. The concern seems to be that lower-paid staff are being exploited, in that they are asked to work overtime without additional pay. Hence they will now become hourly employees and have the opportunity to make more. What this REALLY means, however, is that they will be paid every two weeks rather than every month, the university will have to mount a system of loans to get them through the transition, and they will lose vacation days as their status is changed. This includes, e.g., computer technicians who make salaries around 50K. In short, the federal government is trying to 'help' them and instead they're hurting their feelings by downgrading their status. Presumably, Reagan's desires for less government and less government controls over our lives would be of help in situations like this.

In a recent colloquy there was discussion of accreditation systems and what a consummate waste of time they are. The response was generally, "Yes, but if we don't do it to ourselves the government will do it and that will be worse still."

Reagan's optimism was something that we all can certainly use. I note that both Bush and Kerry are trying to exhibit it in their campaign ads. It doesn't hurt to stop now and then and see some palpable achievements along with continuing challenges.

Apropos one earlier comment about the UC System under Brown vs. Reagan, I can say from experience that at that particular time the U of Wisconsin flourished under the republicans compared with the democrats, despite the fact that the republicans often lodged more criticisms of the culture wars-variety and the democrats pledged more moral support. The bottom line was that the democrats spread money across a plethora of programs, some good, some bad, some indifferent, while the republicans were far more steady in their support. Governor Lucey, a democrat, forced the doctoral cluster of institutions under the same governing board as the old normal schools, to the great detriment of the flagship campus. When the campus was in turmoil, the republican governor stood by the university. He only had one request--that the administration keep the university open, which it did (and this after leftist students bombed Sterling Hall and killed a researcher there and showered the university hospital's patients with shards of broken glass).

After President Reagan died on June 5th it made me reflect on my concerns when he was first elected to the office. I began college in 1980, a child of hard-working parents with little financial means for higher education. I often recall my mother's first response when I told her I wanted to go to college, she said, "Why would you want to do that?" No one in my family had ever been to college. I had a great desire for an education but the Reagan admininstration was looming there for its first term and my elementary understanding was that obtaining financial aid was going to be more difficult. Now, twenty four years later I pulled out loose leaf pages of a personal journal I kept during college and found entries concerning Pres. Reagan. To my surprise I never wrote anything about the financing of my education (the student loan officials made sure I signed all my promissory notes). My recorded concerns over the Reagan administration were about two other topics, the Sec. of the Interior James Watt and the possibility of a military draft. I was much more concerned about the environmental policies under Watt and whether I would be serving in the military. So here we are in 2004 and everything turned out fine. My student loans are paid off. President Reagan was a great president but my education was not his priority; he had other more pressing issues which I am glad he dealt with firmly and with conviction. He was a man of integrity and character which is to be commended in all fields but especially in politics. In the end Reagan taught me something about higher education. Proceed aggressively toward your personal dreams and let government provide stability in the economy and safety for the people.

Although I work in higher education, I have to say that I am consistently amused and occasionally angered by the raging self-absorption of people in higher education. The world does not revolve around us folks.

As to Reagan personally, he was, in my opinion, the greatest president in my short lifetime.

Just some factual corrections to Retiree's message: "Leftist students" did not bomb the Army-Math Research Center at the UW Madison. The Weather Underground did and they were not students. Hospital patients were not showered with shards of glass. The bombing took place in the middle of the night and the grad student who died in the bombing was the only person hurt. And Governor Lucey was still the governor at the time. I started as a freshman at Madison a couple of weeks after the bombing.

Dear Psychologist,

Check your facts. It was not the 'weather underground' but a group calling itself the New Year's gang that bombed Sterling Hall. The name came from an earlier attempt to bomb the ammunition works at Baraboo. David Fine was a student; so was Leo Burt. I can't remember if the Armstrong brothers were enrolled at the time. David Fine returned to campus after serving time in prison and he was put on the student adjudication board (on the grounds that he had more experience with the judicial system than the average student, which, as a convicted felon, was true). Robert Fassnacht, who died, was not a graduate student. He was a postdoc. And windows were shattered at the hospital, which was a very short distance from Sterling Hall. (The new medical complex is on the far west side of campus.)

p.s. And I never said that Lucey was not the governor at the time. I said that Lucey hurt the UW by putting the doctoral cluster campuses under the same governance structure as the old WSU institutions.

Sterling Hall was bombed in 1970. Republican governor who stood by the UW (Pat Lucey didn't):

Knowles, Warren Perley (1908-1993) -- also known as Warren P. Knowles -- of New Richmond, St. Croix County, Wis. Born in River Falls, Pierce County, Wis., August 19, 1908. Republican. Lawyer; member of Wisconsin state senate, 1941-54; served in the U.S. Navy during World War II; delegate to Republican National Convention from Wisconsin, 1948, 1964; Lieutenant Governor of Wisconsin, 1955-59, 1961-63; Governor of Wisconsin, 1965-71. Protestant. Member, American Bar Association; American Legion; Veterans of Foreign Wars; Eagles; Kiwanis. Died suddenly while participating in the annual "Governor's Open" fishing tournament, May 1, 1993. His body was donated to the Medical College of Wisconsin.

I can't remember if the Armstrong brothers were enrolled at the time.

i think karl was enrolled, not full time but part-time, almost at the verge of dropping out. i believe that dwight had already dropped out.

Recalling Reagan's record