<p>With the California economy and the decreasing education funding, do you think UC-Berkeley's quality of education and reputation will drop in the future?</p>
<p>We've seen Michigan being surpassed by Virginia recently, inevitably due to Michigan's strong economic tie with the auto industry. Do you think similar thing will happen with UC-Berkeley?</p>
<p>Do you foresee that the top Southern public universities like Virginia or Texas slowly gain more prominence?</p>
<p>no, UTEP won’t rise to number one. Wonder how they are responding at the Michigan board where you posted an almost identical post.</p>
<p>I fail to understand your logic. Even if Berkeley does start to fall, it does not follow that other public universities will become better.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Nobody is talking about UTEP. The OP is talking about UT-Austin. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Actually, the logic seems to be quite straightforward. If the quality of a school is correlated with funding, and funding for a state school is tied to the health of the economy of that state, then it is logical to deduce that schools in economically healthier states will (relatively) outperform schools in ailing states.</p>
<p>The question for the UC system - and for Berkeley in particular - is whether it can sever the link between state funding and quality. UMichigan has managed to do so impressively by cultivating its large and wealthy alumni base, enjoying by far the largest percentage endowment growth over the last 2 decades of any school in the top 25, and now boasting a larger endowment, both on an absolute and per-student-capita basis, than Berkeley does. </p>
<p>Why can’t Berkeley match that? However, financially successful UM graduates may be, I find it hard to believe that they are more successful than Berkeley graduates are. Berkeley is intimately associated with Silicon Valley, which is arguably the greatest source of wealth creation in modern US history. In contrast, the Midwest auto industry hasn’t exactly been a source of financial stability or development for decades - ‘Rust Belt’ is not an empty moniker.</p>
<p>I heard from a UCSD student that the administrators are exerting more wealth form the other UCs into chiefly Cal and LA. Unsure of the validity, but they do not want Cal to drop in reputation.</p>
<p>^It is true, that is the reason why Berkeley and LA got to maintain the admission numbers they’ve had for the last few years. Getting into Berkeley or LA will be as hard as it has been historically, getting in to SD/D/I/SB will get harder.</p>
<p>Virginia just got a Republican governor, so I would expect massive spending cuts for UVa down the road. </p>
<p>We will be most likely be electing a Democratic governor (Jerry Brown) in 2010 and iff Prof. Lakoff’s initiative to removed the 67% budget/tax rule makes the ballot and passes ([Californians</a> for Democracy - Official site of the CA Majority Rule Campaign](<a href=“http://www.californiansfordemocracy.com/]Californians”>http://www.californiansfordemocracy.com/)), the Dems in the legislature will be able to reinstate UC funding.</p>
<p>The tuition is going 100% to construction bonds, according to a number of articles I’ve read. Apparently the Regents gambled away $23 billion in funding. The university system is getting more funding than ever before. There is no freeze on hiring administrators earning over half a million a year. A lot of people are calling for Jerry Brown to launch a criminal investigation into where the funds are going. </p>
<p>There is also talk of surrounding the capitol with a chain of California residents some time after Thanksgiving weekend.</p>
<p>This are some of the tons of articles on the subject.
[As</a> UC Regents Approve Major Tuition Hike, Students, Faculty Decry Erosion of Public Education in CA and Nationwide](<a href=“http://www.democracynow.org/2009/11/20/students]As”>http://www.democracynow.org/2009/11/20/students)
[Reclaim</a> UC: “They Pledged Your Tuition”](<a href=“http://reclaimuc.blogspot.com/2009/10/they-pledged-your-tuition.html]Reclaim”>http://reclaimuc.blogspot.com/2009/10/they-pledged-your-tuition.html)
[Independent</a> Media Center | <a href=“http://www.indymedia.org”>www.indymedia.org</a> | ((( i )))](<a href=“http://www.indymedia.org/pt/2009/11/931436.shtml]Independent”>http://www.indymedia.org/pt/2009/11/931436.shtml)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The condition of Virginia’s state budget is nowhere near as severe as California’s. UVa is also one of the least reliant upon state funding of all public universities. Therefore, whatever cutbacks UVa may face, it is undeniable that Berkeley’s will be worse. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Rasmussen now has the race tied 41-41. </p>
<p>[Election</a> 2010: California Governor Election - Rasmussen Reports](<a href=“http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections2/election_2010/election_2010_governor_elections/california/election_2010_california_governor_election]Election”>http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections2/election_2010/election_2010_governor_elections/california/election_2010_california_governor_election)</p>
<p>That poll seems to be rather off compared to pass polling data, but also it assumes Meg Whitman can get through the tough primary she has in front of her.</p>
<p>If Berkeley will successfully implement the TFI (Tuition Fee Increase), and if the agreed increase amount would be enough to sustain its operation, and would still be able to provide scholarship grants to many of those that are seeking for it, then Berkeley’s reputation will increase even more in the next years to come.</p>
<p>^How likely is it that they will actually implement the 32% increase though?</p>
<p>I would say very likely.</p>
<p>After a quick google search, this seems like a pretty well written article on the issue of tuition increases and the constructions bonds.</p>
<p>[Bob</a> Meister, “They Pledged Your Tuition to Wall Street”](<a href=“http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/meister211109.html]Bob”>http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/meister211109.html)</p>
<p>I can’t be the only one that’s a little tired of hearing vague accusations with no support.</p>
<p>If the Democrats can get two Republican state senators and two Republican state assembly persons to go against there party to support some kind of tax hike (most likely on the rich or oil companies) that could substitute for the 32% fee increase, then we could get rid of the fee hike.</p>
<p>The problem is our state legislature is extremely gerrymandered, so we have liberal Democrats and very conservative Republicans, so the chance that something like that would pass is infinitesimally small… </p>
<p>The only person in the middle is Arnold…</p>
<p>Here’s a better link to Bob Meister’s three-part letter on the tuition increases:</p>
<p>[They</a> Pledged Your Tuition – Part II & III Released](<a href=“http://occupyca.■■■■■■■■■■■■■/2009/10/29/they-pledged-your-tuition-part-ii-iii-released/]They”>They Pledged Your Tuition – Part II & III Released | occupy california)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That’s because Whitman has clearly been trending upwards in the polls lately. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And that also presumes that Jerry Brown is actually going to run at all. He still hasn’t declared. Even if he does, that’s not to say that a heavy-hitter such as Dianne Feinstein won’t also declare, and spark a bruising primary on the Democratic side. </p>
<p>[The</a> Associated Press: Jerry Brown again? Some Calif. Dems express unease](<a href=“http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gZwobtoMusk5_lir1T_7_7qRpKzQD9BTF0LO0]The”>http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gZwobtoMusk5_lir1T_7_7qRpKzQD9BTF0LO0)</p>
<p>Jerry is running for Governor. This isn’t Virginia. </p>
<p>The trouble with the budget is the 2/3 requirement. We need to overturn that in the next election. I hope it’s on the ballot. Most states allow a simple majority to determine the budget.</p>
<p>The budget has nothing to do with the tuition increase, according to Democracy Now.</p>