CSU board approves tuition increases

By: Kelly Puente



Photographer Reed Saxon
Staged Student Protest after the Board Hearing

 LONG BEACH -- The Cal State University Board of Trustees today approved of a 5 percent tuition increase for students next spring and an additional 10 percent hike for the 2011-2012 school year.


In a meeting at the Chancellor's office in Long Beach, the board voted 14 to 2 in favor of the 5 percent increase and 13 to 3 in favor of the 10 percent increase.

The increase means full-time undergraduates would pay $4,884 in the 2011-2012 school year.


Tuition has been climbing steadily in recent years as CSU struggles to offset state budget cuts. In fall 2002, tuition for full-time undergraduates was $1,507.


Officials say CSU needs at least $115 million in revenue to sustain current levels of enrollment, instruction and student services. The planned 2011-12 tuition increase would generate $121.5 million in revenue.


Due to financial aid, an estimated 180,000 students - half of all CSU undergrads - will be fully covered for the tuition increases, they said.


"While we appreciate the funding that we did receive in this year's budget, the reality is our state support is roughly the same as it was five years ago and we have 25,000 more students," said Benjamin F. Quillian, CSU executive vice chancellor for business and finance.


"In addition, part of the funding we received -- $106 million -- was one-time federal stimulus money that is being used at the state's direction to admit 30,000 more students."


In an organized protest outside of the Chancellor's office, outraged members of Students for Quality Education and CSU faculty members said students shouldn't have to pay the price for budget woes.


"It's egregious to students," said Professor Dori Levey, who teaches nonverbal communication in dance at Cal State Long Beach. "(Board members) are acting like accountants and treating education like a business when it's not a business. There are lives at stake."


They say many students will not be able to afford the nearly $5,000 tuition for the 2011-2012 year.


"CSU says the increase in fees will give more access to classes, but the increase actually cuts of access for students who can't afford it," said Lillian Taiz, president of the California Faculty Association.


CSULB senior Dalia Hernandez, who was one of more than two dozen students protesting, said she did not qualify for financial aid last year and had to take on two part-time jobs to pay for her tuition.


"It's been really hard and the costs just keep adding up," she said.


Hernandez, who is the first in her family to attend college, said it was always her dream to attain a higher education. She hopes to get her master's degree in sociology.


"I'm might have to wait," she said. "I don't know if I'll be able to afford it."



Courtesy Press-Telegram

No More Prisons – Santa Barbara Voters Say No to Measure S

By: Craig Gilmore

Buried under instant analysis of California’s seeming return to being the Left Coast of American politics was a significant vote in Santa Barbara County.

Santa Barbara is one of 11 counties across California to have been offered funds —$56 million in this case— to expand its jail system as a part of Schwarzenegger’s plan to build 40-50,000 new jail and prison cells. State funds would have paid for part of the cost of construction and none of the ongoing operations costs while voters were asked whether to extend a temporary 1/2 cent sales tax increase to pay the county’s share.

In the only ballot measure in California in which voters were allowed to decide whether to expand the prison and jail systems, Measure S went down hard: 61 percent voted NO; 39 percent YES.

Is Santa Barbara another of those hyper-liberal coastal counties? Jerry Brown’s margin of victory statewide over Meg Whitman was 13 percent; he carried Santa Barbara County by only two percent. Steve Cooley, Republican candidate for Attorney General, is in a dead heat with Democrat Kamala Harris statewide. His margin in Santa Barbara was a comfortable five percent.

Was the vote simply anti-tax? Santa Barbara voters approved new bonds for secondary schools (69%-31%) and for primary schools (71%-29%). The statewide proposal to increase vehicle license fees to pay for parks lost (53% NO – 47% YES), but by a far narrower margin than the jail tax. Significantly more voters were willing to pay higher taxes or fees for parks than for jails.

In fact, Santa Barbara votes were in line with every statewide poll result of the past 10 years. Californians have consistently listed prisons as their lowest budget priority, calling for cuts in prison spending in order to preserve or restore K-12 education.

Sacramento has known for years that voters won’t approve new debt for prison expansion, which explains the fact that most counties have not allowed their jail expansion plans to go before voters. When the state legislature approved Schwarzenegger’s massive prison and jail building plan they were careful to ensure that Californians would not be allowed to vote on whether to borrow the $7.7 billion price; instead, they financed it with more expensive lease revenue bonds that don’t require voter approval.

In response to a question of how he will deal with California’s ongoing budget crisis, Governor-elect Brown said he would be guided by these three questions: “What does California need, what does California want and what is California prepared to pay?"

Santa Barbara voters reaffirmed what everyone paying attention to California politics has known for a decade; Californians don’t want more prisons, Californians don’t need more prisons and Californians can’t afford more prisons

Dems Suffer Without Young Voters of Color Who Stole the ‘08 Show

By: Jamilah King

Photo: Getty Images/Jeff Fusco

Today, as Democrats are solemnly tallying up their losses, there’s one inescapable fact about what the midterm electorate looked like: it was overwhelmingly whiter and older than 2008. The questions for President Obama now are what happened to the energetic base of young voters of color who thrusted him to power in 2008? And what will it take to bring them back into his party’s fold before 2012?


According to exit polls’ early tabulation, people under the age of 29 accounted for only 11 percent of voters on Tuesday, a decrease from the 18 percent mark of 2008. More than 20 percent of voters who showed up at the polls this time were over the age of 65, a marked increase from the 15 percent who showed up on Election Day in 2008. These numbers may shift as more data becomes available, but the larger picture is clear: The youth wave of 2008 receded.

Granted, it’s dangerous to compare presidential elections to midterms. Voter turnout is always much lower. The Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement (CIRCLE) released a report this morning arguing that exit poll numbers aren’t really that bad, when taken into context. The group estimates that the youth voter turnout in 2010 was only three percentage points lower than in 2006. But to many observers, the numbers still suggest Democrats are widely underestimating the importance of one of its key constituencies.

“My sense is that young people did turn out where there was infrastructure,” says Rob “Biko” Baker, executive director of the League of Young Voters. Baker noted that the 2012 presidential election begins in March of 2011, and that the youth organizations that helped drive massive numbers of voters in 2008 need to once again be taken seriously.


“We need a bold leadership that inspires young people from both sides of the aisle to fight for our interests,” Baker continued. “Without that, we’re gonna lose a whole generation of young people we just activated in 2008.”

As I reported last week from Milwaukee, young voters of color were the unsung heroes of the Democratic cause two years ago. An historic 66 percent of voters under the age of 29 supported Obama in 2008. Young African Americans between the ages of 18 and 24 voted in higher numbers than any other ethnic group, and two million more headed to the polls in 2008 than 2004. Two million more young Latino voters headed to the polls in 2008, too, along with over half a million more young Asian voters.


That demographic shift was unprecedented and offered encouraging political potential to progressives broadly and Democrats in particular. In a recent New York Times letter to the editor, political scientist and University of Chicago professor Cathy Cohen urged the party to pay special attention to the black youth vote.

“If the party is able to mobilize these young people, it can build a cadre of committed political activists that can carry its message forward for years to come,” Cohen wrote. “Just as the Reagan Revolution embraced people in their 20s who today run the Republican Party, President Obama has the chance to embrace a different group of young people so that they can help shape a transformative political agenda supported by the Democratic Party of the future.”

But so far, it seems that party leadership has completely missed that message. And now, Democrats are paying for it.

Some youth voting organizers have called the president out for his seemingly top-down approach. A recent New York Times story, for instance, featured young voters sounding off against Democrats for focusing the heated healthcare debate so intently on older adults, and for limiting Obama’s late campaign outreach to massive campus rallies. That type of approach stifles innovation and creativity, two elements that made 2008 so appealing to a part of the electorate that had long felt alienated from civic life.

“[Obama] made young people feel important, then he got into office and there was no one talking to us,” Jessica Kirsner, a 21-year-old college student from Florida, told the Times.


The president’s outreach to African American voters overall also seems to have been lackluster. Though the Democratic National Committee spent an unprecedented $3 million dollars on advertising aimed at African Americans during this year’s midterm elections, at least some of the organizers I met in Milwaukee expressed frustration with being talked at, instead if engaged with.

“The future is yours to shape,” President Obama said in an eleventh hour appeal to black radio listeners in Los Angeles on Tuesday. “But if you don’t get involved, then somebody else is going to shape it for you.”

Right now, that appears to be exactly what’s happening.

Courtesy Colorlines

Vote Kamala Harris for Attorney General

Some may have considered the endorsement of our state’s next attorney general a close call, but to me it’s a no brainer. Kamala Harris is the right person for the job.

As the pinnacle of California’s law enforcement authority, her innovative approach and passion for justice is exactly what the state needs in an official. Her credentials have proven to not only be tough on crime, but invested in reducing recidivism. Re-entry initiatives and the Back on Track program are great examples of her commitment to the cause.

Find yourself unimpressed with crime prevention and intervention due to “tough on crime” rhetoric? As San Francisco’s District Attorney, she combated gun violence by doubling gun felony convictions by 90 percent, while using the current laws on the books and not adding new ones. She expanded victim services, created new prosecution divisions focused on child assault, fought gang violence, and developed innovative alternatives to handling narcotics and quality-of-life crimes. Under her leadership, Harris has tripled misdemeanor cases taken to trail, established free legal clinics to immigrant neighborhoods, fought public integrity and environmental crimes, and boosted the overall felony conviction rates in San Francisco reaching its highest point in 15 years.

Surely she can be trusted to defend California’s interests.

When it comes to issues that matter most to everyday citizens, Kamala Harris will be the voice for the people as she fights corporate fraud, environmental injustice, consumer protection, and stronger public safety. She recognizes that California needs more from an attorney general than someone who is apt to overlook the law to fulfill a personal agenda, unlike her opponent Harris does not believe in the effectiveness and power of the death penalty as a deterrent. But has a strong willingness to follow the law in the quest to make a better California.

Remember, voting is a right that comes with privilege. If you have the legal right to vote you are fortunate to participate in making decisions that will impact California’s future. Be Responsible. Be Bold. Exercise Your Choice and vote for Kamala Harris as California’s new attorney general.

Take Action California - VOTE 2010!

Thank you for taking your civic responsibility seriously. As a registered member of Take Action California, you have taken active steps that play a role in shaping California’s future. There is no doubt that you will not let your voice go unheard in the 2010 General Election.

With four days left to vote, we would like to offer some useful voter information to help you make the best informed decision. Your opinion counts so be sure to cast your ballot soon!


Remember, voting is a RIGHT that comes with privilege. If you have the legal right to vote you are fortunate to participate in making decisions that will impact California’s future. Be Responsible. Be Bold. Exercise Your Choice and VOTE TODAY!


Candidates


Governor

Democratic candidate

Jerry Brown

Republic candidate

Meg Whitman



Senate

Democratic candidate

Barbara Boxer

Republic challenger

Carly Fiorina



Attorney General

Democrat Kamala Harris

Republic Steve Cooley



Treasurer

Democrat incumbent

Bill Lockyer

Republican challenger

Mimi Walters



Lieutenant

Republican incumbent

Abel Maldonado Jr.

Democratic challenger

Gavin Christopher Newsom



Controller

Democratic incumbent

John Chiang

Republican challenger

Tony Strickland



School superintendent

Larry Aceves, no party designation

Democrat Tom Torlakson



Insurance commissioner

Democrat Dave Jones

Republican Mike Villines



Secretary of state

Democratic incumbent

Debra Bowen

Republican challenger

Damon Dunn



Propositions

 19 LEGALIZE MARIJUANA UNDER CALIFORNIA BUT NOT FEDERAL LAW. PERMITS LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TO REGULATE AND TAX COMMERCIAL PRODUCTION, DISTRIBUTION, AND SALE OF MARIJUANA. INITIATIVE STATUTE.

SUMMARY

Put on the Ballot by Petition Signatures

Allows people 21 years old or older to possess, cultivate, or transport marijuana for personal use. Fiscal Impact: Depending on federal, state, and local government actions, potential increased tax and fee revenues in the hundreds of millions of dollars annually and potential correctional savings of several tens of millions of dollars annually.

20 REDISTRICTING OF CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICTS. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.


SUMMARY

Put on the Ballot by Petition Signatures

Removes elected representatives from process of establishing congressional districts and transfers that authority to recently-authorized 14-member redistricting commission comprised of Democrats, Republicans, and representatives of neither party. Fiscal Impact: No significant net change in state redistricting costs.



21 ESTABLISH $18 ANNUAL VEHICLE LICENSE SURCHARGE TO HELP FUND STATE PARKS AND WILDLIFE PROGRAMS. GRANTS SURCHARGED VEHICLES FREE ADMISSION TO ALL STATE PARKS. INITIATIVE STATUTE.


SUMMARY

Put on the Ballot by Petition Signatures

Exempts commercial vehicles, trailers and trailer coaches from the surcharge. Fiscal Impact: Annual increase to state revenues of $500 million from surcharge on vehicle registrations. After offsetting some existing funding sources, these revenues would provide at least $250 million more annually for state parks and wildlife conservation.

22 PROHIBIT THE STATE FROM BORROWING OR TAKING FUNDS USED FOR TRANSPORTATION, REDEVELOPMENT, OR LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROJECTS AND SERVICES. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.

Summary

Put on the Ballot by Petition Signatures

Prohibits State, even during severe fiscal hardship, from delaying distribution of tax revenues for these purposes. Fiscal Impact: Decreased state General Fund spending and/or increased state revenues, probably in the range of $1 billion to several billions of dollars annually. Comparable increases in funding for state and local transportation programs and local redevelopment.

23 SUSPENDS IMPLEMENTATION OF AIR POLLUTION CONTROL LAW (AB 32) REQUIRING MAJOR SOURCES OF EMISSIONS TO REPORT AND REDUCE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS THAT CAUSE GLOBAL WARMING, UNTIL UNEMPLOYMENT DROPS TO 5.5 PERCENT OR LESS FOR FULL YEAR. INITIATIVE STATUTE.

Summary

Put on the Ballot by Petition Signatures

Fiscal Impact: Likely modest net increase in overall economic activity in the state from suspension of greenhouse gases regulatory activity, resulting in a potentially significant net increase in state and local revenues.

24 REPEALS RECENT LEGISLATION THAT WOULD ALLOW BUSINESSES TO LOWER THEIR TAX LIABILITY. INITIATIVE STATUTE.


Summary

Put on the Ballot by Petition Signatures

Fiscal Impact: Increased state revenues of about $1.3 billion each year by 2012–13 from higher taxes paid by some businesses. Smaller increases in 2010–11 and 2011–12.

25 CHANGES LEGISLATIVE VOTE REQUIREMENT TO PASS BUDGET AND BUDGET-RELATED LEGISLATION FROM TWO-THIRDS TO A SIMPLE MAJORITY. RETAINS TWO-THIRDS VOTE REQUIREMENT FOR TAXES. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.

Summary

Put on the Ballot by Petition Signatures

Legislature permanently forfeits daily salary and expenses until budget bill passes. Fiscal Impact: In some years, the contents of the state budget could be changed due to the lower legislative vote requirement in this measure. The extent of changes would depend on the Legislature's future actions.

26 REQUIRES THAT CERTAIN STATE AND LOCAL FEES BE APPROVED BY TWO-THIRDS VOTE. FEES INCLUDE THOSE THAT ADDRESS ADVERSE IMPACTS ON SOCIETY OR THE ENVIRONMENT CAUSED BY THE FEE-PAYER'S BUSINESS. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.


Summary

Put on the Ballot by Petition Signatures

Fiscal Impact: Depending on decisions by governing bodies and voters, decreased state and local government revenues and spending (up to billions of dollars annually). Increased transportation spending and state General Fund costs ($1 billion annually).

27 ELIMINATE STATE COMMISSION ON REDISTRICTING. CONSOLIDATES AUTHORITY FOR REDISTRICTING WITH ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT AND STATUTE.


Summary

Put on the Ballot by Petition Signatures

Eliminates 14-member redistricting commission. Consolidates authority for establishing state Assembly, Senate, and Board of Equalization districts with elected representatives who draw congressional districts. Fiscal Impact: Possible reduction of state redistricting costs of around $1 million over the next year. Likely reduction of these costs of a few million dollars once every ten years beginning in 2020.

Jail House Tours

By: Youth Justice Coalition

If you think Halloween is frightening, try being locked up in California! Beware of Cal Trans Zombies, Ghoulish Guards and Dead Men Walking. Get gorged on eye ball punch, and gut-filled cup cakes. And, get an education on the world's largest injustice system. Trip on this: the richest state in the U.S. is also the world's 3rd largest prison system behind the entire U.S. (#1) and China (#2)!!!


Now that's scary!

Friday, October 29, 2010

Haunted Jail House Tours: 6:00 PM - 8:00 PM

Scary Movies: 8:00 PM - Midnight

At Chuco's Justice Center - 1137 E. Redondo Blvd., Inglewood, CA 90302

On the Corner of West Blvd., One Light West of Crenshaw and Florence

By: HHS Network of California

By issuing his line-item veto package – cutting $1 billion from the state budget -- the Governor has made it abundantly clear that he neither values, nor appreciates, the proven economic contributions that strong health and human services are capable of delivering to the state’s economy.


These cuts, which include $256 million from stage 3 child-care (which will cost the state upwards of 60,000 jobs), $366 million from Calworks, and millions from other health care and human services programs, will have significant impacts on all Californians, but it’s women in particular who will suffer most.

By unilaterally imposing massive spending cuts to programs that enable countless women to go to work, go to school and discover new opportunities for success, the Governor is essentially cutting California women off at the knees, and turning his back on decades of progress.

And despite this malicious attack on women and families, Governor Schwarzenegger plans to attend his wife’s annual “Women’s Conference” in Long Beach on Tuesday October 26 – an entire event dedicated to the “empowerment of women.”

We need to tell the Governor that you can’t stand up for women’s empowerment AND cut the very health and human services programs that empower women to better themselves and open new opportunities to succeed!

That’s exactly why hundreds of working families, mothers, advocates and providers are planning to hold an all-day rally outside the conference to demand that Governor Schwarzenegger restore funding to stage 3 child-care, just one of the many programs that suffered as a result of the Governor’s “blue pencil” cuts!

And if you’re in the Long Beach area – you can take action, too!

Take action & show your support on TUESDAY October 26!


Rally to Restore Stage 3 Child-Care Funding
When: Tuesday, October 26 from 6 a.m. – 6 p.m.
Where: Long Beach Convention & Entertainment Center
300 East Ocean Blvd., Long Beach, CA 90802
(Download the flyer)


Click here for more event details!


Not only has the Governor turned his back on the compromise budget agreement that he helped negotiate, but he has taken unilateral action to cut millions from critical and job saving programs, while at the same time victimizing millions of California women, families and children!


Protecting and investing in crucial programs, such as CalWORKS, childcare and community colleges are key to ensuring that California women are empowered to succeed and thrive!

More than anything, the Governor’s actions since the passing of the state budget are just another reminder of why this year’s election in November is so important and timely!

That’s why we need to show our support and VOTE YES on:  


Proposition 24: Repeals the $1.3 billion in tax breaks to wealthy corporations secretly passed in 2008, and helps prevent devastating cuts to health and human services.

Proposition 25: Enables California to pass a responsible budget on time through majority vote, as opposed to the current 2/3rd requirement, which allows a few extremist legislators to hold up the budget & make unreasonable demands, such as corporation tax breaks.

We must also OPPOSE and VOTE NO on:

Proposition 26: Would allow wealthy corporations to blow another billion-dollar in our budget by making it easier for wealthy corporations to get away with polluting or causing health, environmental and other damages without paying mitigation fees. Prop 26 also imposes a supermajority to levy fees.

To learn more about these proposition - be sure to check out the HHS Network's November 2 Ballot Resource Page, available here.

And click here to see the 5 simple things your organization can do for this year's election!