Wednesday, April 23rd 2008
Thinking Responsibly about Fee-Hikes
College Republicans in California are in a unique position to deliver a meaningful blow to special interests and hypocrites everywhere by praising Governor Schwarzenegger for his fiscal responsibility, even though his intended actions come at our own personal cost. The governor’s proposed budget for 2008-2009 includes an across-the-board 10% cut in spending. This would naturally include a roughly $1 billion cut to higher education.
Students who marched on Sacramento yesterday demanded that higher education be given special treatment over all other state expenditures. I would like to ask protesting students from where they think the extra funds should be extracted. Should the money come from a reduction in the quality or number of teachers for primary education? Perhaps we could stop paying our social workers, or rescind programs aimed at protecting the environment. The causes behind these expenditures have their own special interest groups that will be feeling just as disenfranchised as students once the cuts take effect. To serve all of the special interests would require spending money that simply does not exist unless we want to leave massive debt for future generations of Californians.
As a college student, I regret the real effects that budget-cuts to this University will have on me and my peers. Still, I recognize that subsidized education is a privilege and not a right; it is only available to me at the cost of others. I urge all campus Republicans, along with any other champions of reason, to remind other students that these cuts are the result of fiscal responsibility, not a de-emphasis of the importance of higher education.
“I urge all campus Republicans, along with any other champions of reason, to remind other students that these cuts are the result of fiscal responsibility, not a de-emphasis of the importance of higher education.”
Seriously. People tend to take budget re-configuring personally. If someone pulls money from the arts, and you’re an artist, it’s not a personal attack—it’s merely weighing the importance of what areas funds are being allocated to.
The one thing about subsidized education is that while others are paying for us now, we’ll be paying for others in the future. Nobody’s getting a free-ride, the money eventually comes from somewhere.
Comment by Brittany — 4/23/2008 @ 11:47 pm
While I’m all for fiscal responsibility, I do NOT want UC Berkeley’s fees to equal those of Stanford or USC, which they alarmingly are on track to be. I respect your post and your opinion on the matter, but I cannot in good conscience support the Governor’s 10% education cut.
Prison cuts? Fine. Infrastructure cuts? Ok. But education cuts? No way. Not when the ASUC almost raised fees on students two years in a row, and undergraduate fees are getting higher than the Berkeley tree sitter hippies. I consider myself a fiscal conservative as well, but we must draw the line somewhere.
Comment by Tommy — 4/23/2008 @ 11:55 pm
Infrastructure cuts? So we can have bridges collapse and roads deteriorate? How can you consider that a good trade off?
Comment by anon — 4/24/2008 @ 2:23 am
If government cuts infrastructure funding for a year, it’s less of a burden (localities, the Feds, other institutions can pick up the tab). When the Governor slashes UC/CSU funding - the students, and basically only the students, pay. That’s not fair and that’s not good government.
Comment by Tommy — 4/24/2008 @ 10:50 am
i don’t understate how you can claim it’s less of a burden, does that mean you support raising local taxes to cover all those infrastructure costs you propose slashing?
Comment by josh — 4/25/2008 @ 10:31 am
understand not understate*
Comment by josh — 4/25/2008 @ 10:31 am
Of course not. But there are other methods to keeping infrastructure funding available: revenue sharing, bonds, etc. I’m not sure the Regents or the ASUC have those tools at their disposal.
Comment by Tommy — 4/26/2008 @ 11:45 am
BCR ARE COMPLETE IDIOTS. ARNOLD IS TO BLAME FOR ALL OF CALIFORNIA’S PROBLEMS THE LAST 5 YEARS. AND HE’S JUST MAKING THEM A WHOLE LOT WORSE!!!!!!!!!1
Comment by Arnold Berrt — 4/28/2008 @ 12:00 pm
Look in 1947, the Democratis– socialist commies invented the US secret government. Their plan Marxism, explained as welfare — their modi was to new imperialism, make war and cause revolution to take materials from other countries. They had a plan. The republcans did not — just sit and be isolationsits, and rule the rich classes.
Look Communist imperalism was the American Way and no one better for the job than democrats — they do it secretly while saying we peace man — good man…
Comment by Anonymous — 4/30/2008 @ 1:25 am
I TOTALLY support the fee cuts! It’s a GREAT idea. I want Cal to be a TOTALLY PRIVATE school. I HATE that my tax dollars go to fund this garbage school. People have the right to education, if you want to pay for it. I say this because one doesn’t have to ask in order to “expand his mind,” to use a totally cliche phrase. Man has the right to learn whatever he wants; he has the right to education. He does not have the right to steal money from someone else to pay for his education.
More practically, why should we take money from people who never went to college becaues they didn’t have the opportunity, in order to pay for other people to go to college? That’s not okay. Such a system would be theft.
Brittany, someone is getting a free ride. We should let people pay for college who want to pay for it, and not take the money they earn for it later on. We shouldn’t make people pay for education now, but then also not pay for them “later” when they need it. Otherwise, such a taxation system would be wealth redistribution. That’s slavery.
Comment by Ross W. Lingenfelder — 4/30/2008 @ 9:04 pm
Ross, you are a drama queen!
Comment by anonymouse — 4/30/2008 @ 10:41 pm
Ross: You don’t pay any taxes to the government, you $0/year income male chauvanist pig (stop referring to “man”).
Comment by Amen — 5/2/2008 @ 11:04 am