Taxpayers Take a ‘Timeout’ From Pledge to Fund Colleges

Sacramento —  State Librarian Kevin Starr offers the best explanation I’ve heard about why Californians seem to be reneging on their historical commitment to public higher education. Anyway, it’s the most upbeat, hopeful explanation.

And that befits Starr, 63, a fourth-generation native son who is perpetually positive about California. He’s the state’s preeminent historian, having written six books chronicling “Americans and the California Dream.”

“I just think this is part of a larger ‘timeout’ that the American people -- not just Californians -- are giving themselves these days as to what public programs they want to continue to support,” Starr says.

“For instance, [President] George Bush ran up the flagpole the idea that we should go up to Mars. And just as quickly, he took it down the flagpole. The American people in various ways said, ‘We’re not going to pay for a Mars thing.’ In the upcoming election, we’ll see whether the American people want to pay for Iraq.

“There’s a great, big ‘timeout’ going. We’re at the end of a 40-year cycle of public investing -- in highways, universities.... It’s a measure of how embattled people feel in their own lives, their own finances.”

I’ve talked to Starr many times over the years and couldn’t tell you whether he’s a Democrat or a Republican. He’s mostly a Californian who sees the big picture through a realistic lens.

I’d called him to ask what he thought had happened -- why wasn’t California treating college kids today as well as we were treated 40 years ago, give or take. The changes have been slow and subtle, but substantial. Now, the shift is highlighted in Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s budget plan for the next fiscal year, which means the fall semester.

Trying to balance the budget without raising taxes, the governor proposes to cut the University of California by about 7%, or nearly $200 million; California State University by 8.4%, or $220 million. He’d pare back freshman enrollment by 10% at each institution and “redirect” students to the community colleges, guaranteeing them a transfer slot after completing their lower division courses. UC and CSU class sizes would increase.

Students would be paying more and getting less, the continuation of a trend.

The governor advocates raising undergraduate fees by 10% -- to $5,482 annually at UC and $2,250 at CSU. Graduate students would get hit with 40%. At the community colleges, fees would climb by 44%, from $18 per unit to $26.

It’s still a bargain, the governor points out. CSU and community college fees are the lowest in the nation; UC’s among the lowest. UC, CSU and community college students pay only 26%, 17% and 12%, respectively, of their total education costs.

But let’s put this in perspective: When I attended San Jose State, students paid a $29.50 fee per semester. Room, board, books and beer were extra. California’s hierarchy -- its political and business leaders -- were committed to providing a quality, affordable college education to anybody with ability and ambition. Affordable? It was practically free. Same at UC.

In return, we provided a skilled labor pool -- for aerospace, science, schools, newspapers -- and have paid back the state many times over with decades of consumer buying and tax payments.

The leaders -- especially Govs. Earl Warren and Pat Brown and the corporate chieftains -- saw higher education as an investment and a lifestyle upgrade. It was one of the things that set California apart and attracted business and brains. We’re not just about weather, after all.

“At the core of the DNA code for California was the idea that this state could be better for ordinary Americans,” Starr says. “That included access to higher education -- and access to banking services, public swimming pools, golf courses. They had been only for the wealthy. We broadened life in many ways.

“We created this utopian society. And other people’s moms raised no dummies. They came to California, too.”

The Catch-22. It was much easier to be committed to free college educations when there were only 10 million or 15 million Californians and land and living costs didn’t take such big bites.

Funding colleges was easier before we embarked on the costly Medi-Cal healthcare program for the poor. Before K-12 schools became a bigger drain on the state budget because of Prop. 13’s rollback in property taxes. Before we started locking up criminals forever.

And it was more politically sustainable before university students angered middle-class taxpayers with violent protests in the ‘60s.

Still, Sen. Jack Scott (D-Altadena) -- a former Pasadena City College president and current chairman of the Senate Budget Education Subcommittee -- calls this the “shattering of the California dream.”

“It pains me,” he says, adding: “None of this is final and, frankly, as chair, I’m going to do everything I can to reverse some of these serious cuts.”

Starr remains bullish.

“It would worry me if I thought it was a permanent condition. But I don’t,” he says. “The people of California aren’t suddenly getting hard of heart. They’re not losing faith in education. This is just a moment where everything is being reevaluated. People are taking a closer look.”

But the noble era of a free college education for anyone is long gone. The challenge now will be to restore access and maintain quality -- to educate the new immigrants as California once did the Dust Bowl arrivals. And not every kid can wait for a timeout.

*

George Skelton writes Monday and Thursday. Reach him at george.skelton@latimes.com.