On March 2, voters will be asked to approve Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s economic recovery proposal for California outlined in Propositions 57 and 58.
Threats of cuts to California’s education system at all levels have prompted the California Teachers Association and UC officials such as UC President Robert C. Dynes and UCSD Acting Chancellor Marsha Chandler to issue statements supporting the bond measure.
“I personally believe that Propositions 57 and 58 are very important to the University of California,” Dynes said. “Without the economic recovery bond authorized by these measures, the state may be forced into even deeper budget cuts that could further diminish what the university is able to accomplish for our students and for the people of our state. The budget cuts that have occurred already are deep enough.”
Proposition 57, the Economic Recovery Bond Act, authorizes a one-time bond of up to $15 billion in order to compensate for the deficit.
Proposition 58 requires the California Legislature to enact a balanced budget, thereby guarding against any later borrowing. It also establishes a reserve fund to smooth state spending in times of downfalls.
Neither measure can be placed into effect without the other.
Debate surrounding the propositions has featured both bipartisan support and bipartisan criticism.
“These two propositions, taken together, will help California’s economic recovery, keep businesses and jobs from fleeing our state and avoid devastating cuts to public safety, education and other crucial programs,” Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) said in a Feb. 19 speech.
According to UCSD political science professor Thaddeus Kousser, the bond measure will have the immediate effect of taking care of the current deficit. It will allow the Legislature to avoid having to decide between deep cuts and raising taxes. However, Kousser said, it will reduce the amount of money available for the development of California’s infrastructure and for public programs.
Republican State Sen. Tom McClintock has opposed the bond measure.
“Last year, I and many others on this floor believed it was a bad idea to borrow $13 billion to paper over the state’s deficit,” McClintock said in a Dec. 12 state senate floor speech. “I believe it is still a bad idea to borrow $15 billion to paper over that same deficit.”
Opponents of the bill argue that California’s Constitution forbids that bonds such as this one be used to cover deficit spending. They argue that borrowing the money will put the state in deeper debt, lowering California’s already low credit rating.
Opponents also argue that a total debt service from the bond will cost an average family more than $2,000 and argue that although the bond may stave off cuts to current programs, such as education, it will not serve coming generations.
The supporters of the bond measure argue that the bond is the only way to prevent deep and damaging cuts to programs such as education and health care. Co-Chair of Californians for a Balanced Budget and State Controller Steve Westly said the bond should be passed, saying that cuts could threaten these public programs in a Feb. 23 speech.
According to UCSD history professor Michael Bernstein, there are other ways to combat the budget deficit without the bond measure.
“The obvious answers to different ways to handle the situation are to raise taxes and/or to make other cuts in areas that have been more protected in the budget cuts, such as the Department of Corrections,” Bernstein said.
According to both Bernstein and Kousser, the failure of the bond measure could seriously affect the UC system by forcing more cuts to be made.
Bernstein believes that these cuts could be so drastic as to affect the capability of the UC system to adhere to the California Master Plan for Higher Education.
Kousser said that although the UC system will receive immediate benefits from the bond, it will also be affected in the long run by the bond. The long-term effects will not necessarily be positive. The measure will, over the next 10 years as it is repaid, take money away from the rebuilding and creation of California’s infrastructure and the development of public programs, including the UC system, Kousser said.
