We’ve mentioned this countless times, the state’s higher education system should receive more money than the state’s prison system.
We’re not revolutionaries, albeit some of us would like to think so. We just strive to make sense. You know, do what’s right, that kind of thing.
Apparently, our governor is trying the whole ‘making sense thing’ out as well. In his most recent State of the State speech Schwarzenegger announced a plan that would amend our state constitution to mandate that spending on higher education be prioritized over state prisons.
Right now state prisons receive nearly 11 percent of the state budget while higher education receives about 7.5 percent. The governor essentially wants to flip these numbers around.
He seems to be trying, but in the words of our preadolescent friends: FAIL, EPIC FAIL. Confused? We’ll explain.
Sure universities should receive more funding than prisons, but you can’t just mandate it. Things don’t work that way. Government is a delicate machine; you can’t pick at its parts without preparation.
California has plenty of amendments mandating specific spending. Trust us when we say we don’t need another one. Our state has fallen into the habit of spending without perceiving consequences.
This idea may sound great in a speech, but on paper it doesn’t even stand a chance.
Universities — believe it or not — are somewhat self-sufficient. They charge tuition and receive private donations. Prisons don’t. The money used for prisons predominately comes from taxes, even if they’re privatized, as Schwarzenegger wants.
Cut funding to higher education and you’ll see universities scrambling for extra cash. They might raise tuition, cut programs or ask for more money from donors.
Cut funding to prisons, well then the prisons won’t have that money. You can bet your little brother’s tricycle Tookie Williams wasn’t paying tuition.
It might seem awkward to even mention education and incarceration in the same sentence. It might even anger a few that this editorial is seemingly against raising funding for higher education. Trust us it’s not.
California voters believe we should pour money into higher education. OK, that makes sense. We want an educated citizenry.
The voters also believe that criminals should be punished firmly. Prison sentences and parole rules have been enforced tougher. That makes sense too. We want our state to be safe. At the same time, however they want a number of other things, one of them being lower taxes.
Do you see why we strive to make sense? It is because so many fail to do so. If we want to solve the problems plaguing this state’s economy one amendment isn’t going to do it. Government doesn’t work that way. Reform can’t be forced it has to be calculated and measured.
Our state’s programs and systems can’t keep playing musical chairs with funding — they’ve been doing so for too long.
While this editorial board believes in priority for higher education, we have burdened ourselves by clinging to what makes sense. This amendment doesn’t make any sense at all. It seems like we’ll have to wait just a little bit longer before Arnold fixes education.