News, Views and Careers for All of Higher Education
Nov. 9, 2005
Community colleges won major victories Tuesday when voters approved a series of bond measures — worth well over $1 billion together — to finance major construction projects and other improvements.
It was a particularly good election for higher education in California, where voters rejected a measure that would have imposed new limits on state spending. Public colleges in California have repeatedly been hurt by existing limits and many feared that the new measure, if it had been approved, would have been devastating to efforts to provide sound levels of state support for the state’s colleges and universities.
Among the bond measures approved by voters:
In other measures, voters in Maine rejected a bid to overturn the state’s gay-rights law, which bars discrimination based on sexual orientation in employment and in education. While colleges in Maine generally said that they would not discriminate even if the law had been repealed, many feared the message that repeal would have sent to their gay students and professors.
San Francisco voters sent a (non-binding) message on Tuesday, approving by a wide margin the College, Not Combat measure to encourage colleges and public schools to bar military recruiting on their campuses and to encourage the creation of more scholarships so students do not feel that they need to join the military to pay for a higher education.
Voters on Tuesday also elected governors in New Jersey and Virginia. Jon Corzine was the victor in the former and Tim Kaine in the latter. Both are Democrats who have pledged strong support for higher education. Corzine’s higher education platform stressed support for research and job-training programs. Kaine’s plans for colleges include a new four-year institution and the creation of more scholarships, especially for students who perform community service.
Want it on paper? Print this page.
Know someone who’d be interested? Forward this story.
Want to stay informed? Sign up for free daily news e-mail.
Advertisement
Advertisement
or search for jobs directly.
The College of Education at Troy University, Troy, Alabama invites applications for a full-time non-tenure track position at ... see job
PART-TIME TEMPORARY FACULTY TO TEACH MANAGEMENT COURSES Central Michigan University seeks qualified part-time temporary ... see job
The University of Minnesota is a premier employer and a talent magnet attracting leading faculty and staff from around the ... see job
Adirondack Community College (ACC) is a comprehensive community college and member of the State University of New York (SUNY) ... see job
Howard Community College is building a pool of applicants for adjunct faculty positions in Continuing Education in the areas ... see job
The University of Minnesota is a premier employer and a talent magnet attracting leading faculty and staff from around the ... see job
Funded with a five year federal grant the Clinical Instructor/Educational Specialist working together with the Project ... see job
School of Engineering & Architecture Department: Industrial & Mechanical Engineering Discipline(s): Industrial Engineering ... see job
Situated on rolling hillsides in southern Pennsylvania, Cheyney University, established in 1837, the oldest institution of ... see job
The University of Minnesota is a premier employer and a talent magnet attracting leading faculty and staff from around the ... see job
Waiting on the spin
I suspect more than a few people unfamiliar with the structure of California Proposition 76, what Governor Schwarzenegger called the “Live Within Our Means Act,” will be tempted to say that California voters made a gross blunder. Let me explain the single biggest problem with 76 before the spin doctors enter the fray.
Prop 76 would have defined a “fiscal emergency” as being in effect during any quarter in which revenues trailed spending by more than 1.5%. That’s good. It would have limited spending to the previous budget plus a three-year moving average of growth, putting surpluses into a fund for those times we fell short. That’s also good. If a fiscal emergency were declared, the legislature would have had either thirty or forty-five days, depending on which quarter it was, to propose a solution backed by 2/3 of its members. That was good. That’s also the end of the good part.
The governor, should the legislature fail to get a budget through, would then get broad powers to cut the budget wherever he or she wished. This sounds good but for one small detail: the governor could also veto any budget proposed by the legislature during a fiscal emergency without providing the legislature more time to reach a new agreement. This is bad.
In effect, a governor—and it really doesn’t matter of what political stripe—who came to the table with an agenda could nix any proposal presented by the legislature and force cuts at will, unilaterally. While such a move would almost certainly spell doom for the governor’s political career, the damage done by even one quarter under such a budget could take decades to repair.
Why can’t anyone write decent proposals anymore?
Andrew Purvis, at 7:18 am EST on November 9, 2005