When the going gets tough for the state of
going.
Historically, amid deficit, the state government places
additional costs of higher education on students’ backs, and after a decade of
steep increases, the trend will likely continue as students are expected to
face yet another hit in 2008-09. According to Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s state
budget proposal, students would see a 7.4-percent increase in mandatory fees,
intensifying the longstanding problem of college affordability and leaving room
for the UC Board of Regents to tack on extra dollars, which does nothing to
calm student fears.
The increase translates to a system wide fee of $490 for
resident undergraduates and $546 for resident graduate students, amounting to
$7,126 in annual tuition for in-state undergraduates. As if that’s not
troublesome enough for the countless struggling college students and their
families, the proposal also permits the regents to increase fees beyond the
recommended levels to compensate for the extent of UC budget cuts. Considering
that UC’s state funding would fall $400 million below the amount requested by
the regents under the proposal, it’s pretty easy to predict what they will do.
Granted, the state and UC system must endure severe cuts
across the board to address the state’s estimated $14.5-billion debt and the
recommended 7-percent increase is consistent with the previous year; however,
the state too often expects costs to be backfilled by student fee increases,
forcing students to help bail the state out of a debt they did not create.
While students and their families are becoming desensitized
to the rising numbers on their college tuition statements, the cost of a UC
education has more than doubled in less than a decade. While
future by producing an educated workforce and dynamic economy, public education
is becoming a privilege for the wealthy rather than an equalizer to close the
gap between rich and poor. While more people may be attending college, students
are faced with increased amounts of debt, making the goal of a “dynamic
economy” an unrealistic ideal until the state government stops punishing
students for its poor planning and starts prioritizing access to public
education.
