November 14, 2007

California Students Attempting Tuition-Freeze Ballot Initiative

California students are hoping to put what they claim is the first student-led ballot initiative before voters in 2008 after they filed the initiative today with the state’s attorney general. The measure would freeze tuition at University of California and California State University institutions for five years, and pay for it by levying “a 1-percent tax on taxpayers’ personal income above $1 million.”

For the measure to appear on the November 2008 ballot in California, the students will need to amass 433,971 signatures within 150 days. Given that the California State University trustees have tentatively approved up to a 10-percent hike in tuition for students next year, and the University of California regents recently approved increases for professional programs, mobilizing the more than 600,000 students in the systems for a tuition freeze may not be an impossible task. —JJ Hermes

Comments

1. I never cease to be amazed at the losers that end up in college. I wonder. . .are they losers before they get there? Or do they learn to be losers once enrolled?

   I wonder if they have even the slightest clue what it takes to run an institution of higher learning? They want the best faculty, but don’t want them paid appropriately? They want the best facilities, but shouldn’t contribute to their upkeep? They want the latest technology, but apparently think the institution should “download” it for “free?” No. . . probably not. They just want other people to pay for it. . .

   Here’s an idea! Pay for your own damned education! Perhaps you’ll get more out of it. . .

   — Bill    Nov 15, 07:47 AM    #

2. No doubt, Bill, you paid for your own education? Society does indeed benefit from an educated citizenry, and there is absolutely no reason education should not be among the public goods paid for in part by taxation. Here’s an idea – peddle your dimly understood self-reliance notions elsewhere.

   — steven    Nov 15, 09:27 AM    #

3. Perhaps the losers have realized that the escalating cost of their education will put them in a financial bind for a decade or more. Their actions sound logical to me based on critical analysis (something taught at institutes of higher learning)

   — Sherry    Nov 15, 11:46 AM    #

4. In fact, Steven, I did pay for my own education – it took many years of non-traditional attendance while I worked long hours and supported a family, but that’s what I did because that’s the only way I could afford it.

   “Dimly understood self-reliance notions?” For you, perhaps. . . Self-reliance is not dimly understood by those who are productive and responsible. . . And the “educated citizenry” rationale is what justifies taxation for public schools, no matter how inadequate or incompetent the curriculum. In most states, the taxpayer already contributes to public colleges and universities (I’m forced to subsidize institutions that compete with my own!). The idea that the taxpayer should be further burdened is ridiculous and could only emanate from selfishness and greed. Take a semester off, work and save some money . . . take out additional loans and then pay them back. Stop looking for a free ride on someone else’s dime.

   There’s only one thing that for me is “dimly understood”. . . why is it that so many people who participate on the Chronicle’s blogs feel obliged to tell those they disagree with to stop expressing their opinion? Why is that, Steven? Why should I take my opinions elsewhere because you disagree. . .

   — Bill    Nov 15, 11:53 AM    #

5. Perhaps Bill, the issue here is that you are calling students stupid simply because they want an affordable PUBLIC higher education. California’s higher education system was founded on the basis of creating opportunity for the public— when California public schools are located in areas with some of the highest costs of living, and in addition fees keep increasing at excessive rates aren’t we then denying opportunities to thousands of students? I do not think it is your place to call students stupid because they solely want the opportunity to have a higher education degree.

   — Eddie    Nov 15, 12:04 PM    #

6. Sure Bill. We’ll keep doing things the way thy have always been done. That kind of thinking is not really the cornerstone of innovation. Shouldn’t we (1) strive to make things better and (2) applaud when the people with the most at stake make those steps? If the students get this on the ballot, or not, I applaud them for doing something. They are not simply complaining about tuition costs.

   — John    Nov 15, 12:07 PM    #

7. Today’s college students need the government’s help to defray tuition costs. I have students who are working two jobs and attending school full time. At one time the United States was one of the most educated countries and that is no longer the case. In order for citizens to value education, our government, both local and federal, must do so.

   — Carmel    Nov 15, 12:52 PM    #

8. You know, I have to laugh when we’re accused of wanting “the best faculty” then not wanting to pay for it. Despite the fact that I will owe more than a FAIR amount for undergrad and graduate loans, I still encounter instructors who, by no means, should be teaching…I’d almost be willing to settle for an advisor who actually answers my emails…

   — KFL    Nov 15, 01:00 PM    #

9. I agree with most of the above sentiments and do applaud the students for “doing something.” However, being an employee at a CSU I understand how financially strapped my campus is, especially in times of escalating enrollments and decreased state contributions. Someone has to pay to keep the University running, and that is either the state, students, or private benefactors. The best faculty, best facilities, and quality student life comes at a price. It should also be noted that the CSU system is one of the lowest, if not THE lowest priced 4 year education in the country. CSU students today pay what I paid 20 years ago to attend a Pennsylvania state school (roughly $3500 in tuition a year).

   — Carson    Nov 15, 02:41 PM    #

10. The Republican-led “budget revolt” swept Gray Davis out of office by humiliating recall, only to replace him with a slick actor whose budgets never closed the structural deficit and masked his meager attempts with pie-in-the-sky projections, few of which came true. What new monies came in were immediately spent on non-deficit-closing projects. So he’ll pander to the Republican base and “balance” the budget on the backs of the indigent, the sick, the students, and the teachers, while upping the allocation to prisons and lowering the taxes on corporations. Welcome to the new boss, same as the old boss.

    — marci    Nov 15, 03:07 PM    #

11. Well, Bill, should I assume that when you say “I did pay for my own education” you mean that you paid tuition, perhaps fees, and then sent the institution about four times that amount absent a bill? The extant literature suggests that the amount students pay averages ~20% of the “total cost” of an education. Note the quotes, I’m an accountant as well as an academic so am careful with labels like “total cost”.

    I paid for my own education [I suspect] in the same fashion you did – I scrimped and saved, ate macaroni for years, and ‘earned’ a series of fellowships to finance graduate school. I probably “paid” about 10% of the “total cost” of my education [depends on how one amortizes the lack of productivity related to my aggravation of my mentors].

    I’m also not particularly swayed by the “you’re wanting the public to fund unfair competition to my uni” argument. Privatization just doesn’t work nearly as well as you hypothesize – if you’d like some evidence of that I suggest you read McCloskey or Samuelson, review the literature on charter schools, or, indeed, the WSJ.

    And just to make it very clear, I am a CSU faculty member concerned for my students’ welfare, not a disgruntled student looking for a handout.

    As you, I’m less than thrilled by the spending habits of those with spending authority in the CSU, but that is a different argument.

    — steven    Nov 15, 04:53 PM    #

12. We need to back up a bit and see why tuition is so high. Many of the costs at our university are due to wasteful spending and frills. Many of the frills are those demanded by the very same students who are complaining about cost. For example, students are demanding that we deploy wireless internet access in residence halls in addition to the preponderance of wired ports. The list goes on.

    — V    Nov 16, 09:14 AM    #

13. Here’s the bottom line. Students in California, or any other state, should be down on their knees thanking the taxpayers (state and federal) for what they already provide, not acting like ungrateful little snots by demanding even more.

    — Bill    Nov 19, 07:23 AM    #

14. bill just keep paying for chancellor’s luxuries and even their funerals

    http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/06/25/MNG91JK4T01.DTL

    http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/07/13/MNGMPJUDCI1.DTL

    http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/11/14/MNGDFFO0JJ1.DTL

    — MojoJoJo    Nov 19, 11:48 PM    #

15. Bill, your comment about being a snob is actually quite funny. I cannot believe that you would rather use a large portion of taxpayer dollars to fund the prison system instead of investing taxpayer dollars into education. California claims that education is the top priority, yet more money from the general fund is allocated to the prison system.

    There is a reason students decided to attend a public institution…because it should be affordable!!! Having tuition increase by 7-10 percent each year is unpredictable.

    Why thank??? Maybe I should buy a thank you card for spending OUR tax dollars to pay for the cable that inmates have??? I think I will let you get that card…as I student I cannot afford a hallmark card.

    — Brian    Nov 20, 01:13 AM    #

16. I give many cheers to the students for making a very strong effort to stand up for what they believe in.

    I am also a CSU employee and I see how the money is spent. The campus presidents continue to get annual (if not semi-annual) increases to their salaries which are already excessive. Our own Lt. Governor has been present at the Board of Trustee meetings when this issue has been discussed. At the meetings earlier this month (12th, 13th at the chancellor’s office in Long Beach), Garamendi and Trustee Melinda Guzman were also against the increases for student tuition. Trustee Guzman requested data to support the increases and also research to find other alternatives.

    It is not only the students that are getting “boned” (for lack of a better word). The staff have been struggling for years since the cost of living steps were taken away. COST OF LIVING folks! You know, the essential stuff. I go to work and I do a good job and feel good about it. I get my paycheck and I want to cry. Many of my co-workers, as the students, have to take on other jobs to make ends meet. These are very hard times for all. The CSU system should not try to make up for it from the less advantageous. Perhaps the campus presidents might be able to go without their housing allownances or car allowances that they get in addition to their $299,000.00 salaries. Who needs a car allowance when they make that much money? That is a question that each and every California tax payer should be asking themself right now!

    I TIP MY HAT TO THE
    STUDENTS!!!

    — Lili    Nov 29, 02:56 PM    #

Previous: The Chronicle Joins 12 News Organizations in Social-Networking Experiment
Next: U. of Oxford's Top Official to Step Down in 2009