Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s proposed budget has thus far
unaltered his public image, despite the controversial nature of its
provisions, according to policy experts from the University of
California.
“I think he went into (office) with a very positive image
to begin with, and I think he so far has been able to protect that
(image) fairly well,” said David Sears, a UCLA political
science professor.
Other policy experts agreed it is too soon to determine the
proposed budget’s effect on Schwarzenegger’s image.
“This is the first inning really. It’s very early in
terms of shaping public opinion,” said UCLA political science
Professor Matthew Baum.
The budget promotes an image of Schwarzenegger as mediator
between partisan legislators, said Bruce Cain, a political science
professor at the University of California, Berkeley.
“(Gov. Schwarzenegger) has shown a willingness to do deals
with anyone … whatever it takes, and that is a refreshing change
from what we have seen before,” he said.
Neither Republicans nor Democrats, Baum said, are completely
pleased with the proposed budget.
“So far he has managed not to antagonize either side. …
In some sense he has done the easy part … but the problems
remain,” Sears said.
Conflict with legislators may result as budget negotiations
carry on, Sears said.
He added that the budget also does not solve for a gap between
state spending and revenue.
Decisions made regarding this future gap may alter public
opinion.
Increased awareness of potential spending cuts by those directly
affected also can result in greater agitation, he added.
Schwarzenegger’s budget, which diverts $1.3 billion of
property tax funds from local governments to the state, has the
potential to raise opposition among local officials, said Barbara
Sinclair, a UCLA political science professor.
This budget provision takes back a portion of the money
Schwarzenegger promised to restore to local governments after
decreasing the car tax, Sinclair said.
“I just think that it is potentially politically a real
problem for him because it looks like a betrayal,” she
said.
In addition, faculty and students already are expressing concern
due to proposed fee increases for undergraduate and graduate
students, along with a 10 percent UC freshman enrollment cut.
According to Department of Political Science Chair Michael
Lofchie, fee increases and decreased financial support can make the
university less accessible to some students, even though it is too
early to make judgements.
Resident and non-resident tuition fee increases for graduate
students can make UCLA’s graduate schools less competitive
with other institutions, Lofchie added.
“We already know that our graduate financial support
packages are not competitive with other major universities with
which we compete for graduate students, and that is only going to
make that more difficult,” he said.
Increased fees in Schwarzenegger’s budget also have raised
anxiety among students.
Kurt Jusso, who graduated from UCLA in 2003 and is applying to
graduate school, said the raised fees will affect him directly.
“For me, since I am trying to get into graduate school,
its $2,100 more ““ I don’t like that too much,”
Jusso said.
Despite student and faculty concern, the California Teachers
Association has expressed support for the budget.
“The proposal represents a sacrifice by our students,
teachers and schools, but we believe it is a good and fair
agreement in the context of this state’s serious fiscal
crisis,” said Mike Myslinski, a CTA spokesman.
The CTA’s support for the proposed budget, Baum said,
helps protect Schwarzenegger’s image.