Judging from Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s preliminary
budget, he seems to be sticking to an agreement he made with the
University of California last year.
But fulfillment of that compact is still months away, if the
governor is able to keep the agreement at all.
The compact, made in May last year, outlined an agreement
between the UC and the governor stating the university would endure
$372 million in cuts in 2004 in exchange for increased funding in
subsequent years.
Schwarzenegger’s $111.7 billion 2005-06 state budget
proposal, released Monday, seems to reflect this agreement, as he
has proposed increasing funding by $97.5 million to the UC.
But the reality for the university is that its agreement with
the governor is not legally binding. In other words, the UC could
endure another year of deep cuts, and there is nothing it could do
about it.
UC officials are nonetheless optimistic that the governor will
hold up his end of the bargain.
“The fact that the state was facing such a difficult
budget challenge and yet the governor remained fully committed to
this compact suggests that he is very cognizant of the importance
of the UC to the overall success of the state,” said Brad
Hayward, a spokesman with the UC Office of the President.
Hayward said while the UC realizes the compact is not binding
for the governor, abiding by its agreement is certainly beneficial
as a show of support for the university.
“Why did we enter into the compact in March? Because
it’s much better to have a statement of support from the
governor for higher education and a baseline foundation of what he
plans to provide for higher education than to have nothing at
all,” he said.
Joel Aberbach, director of the UCLA Center for American Politics
and Public Policy, said though such compacts are not governed by
the law, they still hold some weight with both parties
involved.
“People enter into (compacts) because they think they have
a certain moral standing, and as a result a certain set of
obligations are set up,” he said.
Aberbach cited the Democratic party’s claims that
President Bush underfunded his own No Child Left Behind Act as an
example of an unrealized agreement on the federal level. The
Democrats had expected a certain level of funding when the program
was authorized and have not been pleased with the
administration’s subsequent appropriations to the program, he
said.
Additionally, there are often unseen political or economic
pressures which could change the way state leaders adhere to a
compact like the one with the UC, Aberbach said.
“(Compacts) are made a year or two before the actual
budgets are done, and sometimes there are a variety of problems
that can come between the compact and the actual execution of
it,” he said.
UC President Robert Dynes appeared optimistic in a press release
responding to the governor’s budget.
“The governor has fulfilled his commitments under the
compact, providing many of the basic resources we need to begin
rebuilding our programs and to sustain our contributions to
California’s economic competitiveness and quality of life. We
appreciate the governor’s support for higher education and
its transformative impact on the state,” Dynes wrote.