Statement of Governor Ronald Reagan on Tuition
January 17, 1967
In all the sound and
fury of the budget discussion of recent days, this administration has been
portrayed as an opponent of educational ideas engaged in total warfare against
the academic community – sole defender of cultural and intellectual
progress. I think it’s time to put the
entire picture in focus and reestablish a sensible and realistic perspective.
Students and parents of
student have been unnecessarily disturbed and even frightened by the
University’s precipitate and unwarranted freeze on applications. This action, I might add, was taken by the
University without consulting the Board of Regents. I have called this action unwarranted and I
believe it is completely so.
As plainly as we can we
have told the citizens of this state the nature and size of our financial problem. We are
trying through economies of roughly 10 percent to effect
savings somewhat in excess of $200 million, and we’ll strive for more. But even so a part of the deficit will have
to be made up from new revenues. At the
same time we must provide a margin for a new, broader-based tax to relieve the
overburdened property taxpayer, principally the home owner.
Every segment of
government must share in the economies first, as every citizen must share in
the increased taxes. Education and
welfare total 80 percent or more of the general fund spending. There is no way we could exempt them from the
belt tightening that is necessary. If we
did, we’d have to eliminate all other government services to arrive at any
meaningful reduction.
So there is the problem
… we just simply have a shortage of dollars.
It is hard to believe there is no leeway for cost cutting in the
University program. Right at the moment
I’m tempted to suggest a cut in the University’s approximately $700,000-a-year
public relations budget since it would seem a good share of it is being spent
publicizing me.
But let me make it
plain; I don’t pretend the economies will be easy for any of us. Some will – we will find unneeded fat that
can be whittled away without scratching a single muscle [fibre],
but like any family faced with this problem, we will all have to give up some
things we would like. This is a
temporary thing. If professors take on
an added work load, this isn’t a permanent change in policy. I share their hopes for continued progress in
educational standards and achievement, but I ask them now to share in the
burden with the rest of us until we can put our house in order.
This brings me to the
furor over our suggestion that among the several possibilities for minimizing
the effect of budget costs is tuition.
This suggestion resulted
in the almost hysterical charge that this would deny educational opportunities
to those of the most moderate means.
This is obviously untrue for two reasons:
- First, we made it plain that tuition must be
accompanied by adequate loans to be paid back after graduation and that
scholarships should be available to provide that no deserving students be
denied educations due to lack of funds.
More important is the
false impression given that enrollment in the University is now in some way
based on the ability to pay. This is not
true. Eligibility for theUniversity actually is limited to those in the top 12 percent
scholastically.
On this principle 88
percent of the high school students cannot go to the University regardless of
their finances or their desires.
Let me read from the
text of a letter sent to one of our newpapers by
three economics professors at UCLA:
“At present, every
student, regardless of whether he or his parents are rich or poor, is given a
subsidized scholarship of about $2000 a year (actually, our figures show it is
about $3000). The
wealthy benefit from this bonanza at the expense of the poor. Seventy-two percent of the 18-year-olds from
the families with income over $14,000 are in colleges but only 12 percent from
families with less than $2000 annual income.
Yet, the taxes for financing the bonanza bear more heavily on the poor
than on the rich.”
Incidentally, the full
text of that letter also is attached.
Now, let me summarize.
The problem, briefly, is
finances. We face a major deficit and we
must find a way to eliminate it.
The answer lies with all
of us. There are no exceptions.
I believe the education
sector of our government can and must help in this. Indeed, it has a responsibility to help.
As far as we are
concerned we do not intend to continue carrying on this discussion as some sort
of a contest in the press.
We now look forward to
meeting with the Regents, the Trustees and the administrators in an atmosphere
of mutual respect, good will, and understanding to find the best answer for all
the people of