Pubdate: Thu, 7 Jan 2010
Source: Los Angeles Times (CA)
Page: Front Page, continued on page A8
Copyright: 2010 Los Angeles Times
Contact: http://mapinc.org/url/bc7El3Yo
Website: http://www.latimes.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/248
Authors: Shane Goldmacher and Larry Gordon, Reporting from Los 
Angeles and Sacramento
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/prison.htm (Incarceration)
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/find?225 (Students - United States)
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/find?199 (Mandatory Minimum Sentencing)
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/people/Schwarzenegger

GIVING STUDENTS PRIORITY OVER INMATES WILL TEST GOVERNOR

At the center of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's State of the State 
speech Wednesday was a proposal that outside of Sacramento might seem 
like common sense: Mandate that the state invest more dollars each 
year in its public universities than in locking people up in prison.

But to many inside the Capitol, that idea appears all but unattainable.

The plan -- and the reaction to it -- highlights the disconnect 
between the priorities of voters and the reality of the state's 
shattered finances and a policymaking process that often seems byzantine.

"In concept, it absolutely makes sense to everyone," said Thad 
Kousser, visiting professor of political science at Stanford 
University. But "when you look at the trade-offs that the state might 
face to get there, it gets a lot harder."

The proposal for a constitutional change that would require more 
spending on higher education than prisons was the key headline as 
Schwarzenegger delivered his final State of the State speech, in 
which he also asked legislators to approve a jobs creation program 
and urged them to join him in pushing for increased funding from Washington.

The governor's plan aims to bring back the days when the state 
funneled more money into University of California and California 
State University classrooms than into its prisons. It has been at 
least five years since that has been the case. It comes at a time 
when tuitions are soaring and course offerings are being cut.

The state's public universities, long considered an economic engine 
and a source of pride for California, have proved to be an easier 
target for budget cuts than other major programs, which are protected 
by politically powerful unions, deep pocketed corporate interests or 
federal laws limiting the state's ability to cut.

"What does it say about a state that focuses more on prison uniforms 
than caps and gowns?" Schwarzenegger said. "The priorities have 
become out of whack. . . . Thirty years ago, 10% of the general fund 
went to higher education and 3% went to prisons. Today, almost 11% 
goes to prisons and only 7.5% goes to higher education."

The governor called for a constitutional amendment that would 
prohibit corrections spending from outstripping funds for higher 
education by 2014-2015. The plan would require approval from 
lawmakers and voters.

University leaders said they were delighted that the governor was 
championing the proposed amendment, which UC President Mark G. Yudof 
called "a visionary way to address the issues."

Charles B. Reed, chancellor of the 23-campus Cal State system, 
acknowledged that gaining approval for the measure would require 
"heavy lifting," but said he thought it ultimately could win favor 
with the Legislature and voters.

"It's a step to begin to change the culture of California back to 
investing in California's future rather than just paying expenses for 
California's failures," Reed said.

But lawmakers have been unable to trim the corrections budget for 
years. Voters and politicians alike have approved years of stiffer 
sentences and stricter rules for parolees -- driving up the prison 
population. The result has been a prison network bursting at the 
seams, with federal judges taking control of prisoners' healthcare 
and ordering the state to either release tens of thousands of inmates 
or boost prison spending by billions. Lawmakers so far have chosen to 
keep spending.

Although some legislators applauded the governor's goal, they were 
immediately skeptical of his plan for reaching it.

It calls for cutting spending through privatization -- either having 
private companies run prisons or hiring private firms to supply 
state-run facilities with guards, doctors, teachers and other 
employees. Most current prison workers are part of a powerful union, 
the California Correctional Peace Officers Assn.

"I don't think privatizing prisons is the answer," said Assembly 
Speaker Karen Bass (D-Los Angeles). "I think we need to look at why 
California incarcerates more people than any other state. We need to 
look at ways to reduce recidivism and we certainly need to look at 
sentencing reform."

Republicans tend to support privatization, but they have other 
concerns. Many of the state's financial problems have been 
exacerbated by conflicting constitutional mandates already on the 
books that dictate increased spending for various programs each year. 
The new proposal would be another of those. And GOP lawmakers are not 
eager to impose the prison cuts that would be required to free up 
money for universities.

"The most essential of government functions is public safety," said 
Sen. Tony Strickland (R-Thousand Oaks), "and we have to make sure 
that's our top priority."

In the current budget, UC, Cal State and the state's Cal Grant 
financial aid program combined to receive about $6 billion, not 
including revenues from student fees. The Department of Corrections 
and Rehabilitation received $8.12 billion, according to the 
nonpartisan Legislative Analyst's Office. Under the governor's plan, 
spending on UC, Cal State and Cal Grants would have to account for at 
least 10% of the state's general fund by 2014-15; prisons could 
receive no more than 7%. The guarantee could be suspended by a 
two-thirds vote of the Legislature.

Changing that ratio would require the type of deep cuts in prison 
spending that Sacramento has long balked at making. Federal courts 
also would have to give their blessing. Short of deep cuts in the 
prison budget, the only other way to meet the mandate would be to 
find billions of new dollars for universities elsewhere in the budget 
at a time when the state is facing enormous deficits.

In the 1970s, the share of the state budget set aside for UC, Cal 
State and state financial aid was about 13%, nearly four times as 
large as the percentage for corrections, according to the California 
Postsecondary Education Commission. Funding for the two sectors drew 
close in the early 1990s and prisons then pulled ahead consistently 
starting in 2004-05, the commission reported.

Steve Boilard, director of higher education issues in the Legislative 
Analyst's Office, questioned the proposed link between higher 
education and prisons, even if it might appeal to voters.

"It's apples and oranges," he said of universities and prisons. "Why 
should state spending on higher education be determined on how much 
we save on prison reform?"

Yudof, president of the 10-campus UC system, said he did not know 
whether it was politically wise to link university and prison 
funding. But he hailed the governor's plan as "a very useful opening 
salvo" to restore higher education funding.

"I don't have any particular argument with corrections or the need to 
lock up bad guys," Yudof said. "But having the best prison system in 
the world is not going to create jobs the way having the best 
university system will." 
- ---
MAP posted-by: Richard Lake