Covering the Real Costs of College

Faced with the state’s high cost of living, California college students struggle to secure adequate food and housing. Even amid one of the largest and longest economic expansions in state history, 33% of students are housing insecure and 35% have low or very low food security, according to a California Student Aid Commission survey of 150,000 college students. As the state seeks to meet economic demand by producing more students with degrees and certificates, the full cost of college remains a barrier to progress.

Governor Newsom and the legislature have recognized the need to reform state financial aid programs to address the full cost of college. The 2019–20 state budget provided $41 million in ongoing funding to help colleges address food and housing insecurity, $19 million to support rapid rehousing programs, and increased the number of competitive state grants for non-traditional students from 25,750 to 41,000.  Additionally, the legislature increased the maximum award amount that students with children pay for non-tuition college costs from $1,672 to about $6,000.

However, broader reform of the state grant aid program remains elusive. Two recent bills sought to expand eligibility for Cal Grants by eliminating current age, time out of high school, and high school GPA requirements. The bills also sought to provide additional non-tuition aid to community college students and students in career education programs.  The bills did not make it to a vote; however, they will be re-examined in the next legislative session. Estimated at $2 billion per year, proposed reforms would nearly double the annual cost of the program.

Consequently, the California Student Aid Commission, the agency that distributes financial aid, intends to streamline these proposals to constrain costs while increasing access. Higher education is a vital tool that increases economic and social mobility; ensuring all students have equal access to an affordable education is paramount to modernizing California’s economy. An equitable and financially viable approach to financial aid will be critical if the state’s booming economy slows in coming years.

A Coordinating Council for Higher Education

The California Legislature and Governor Newsom are interested in creating a new coordinating entity for the state’s public higher education system. The state has been without such an entity since 2011, when Governor Brown vetoed funding for the California Postsecondary Education Commission (CPEC). A new coordinating entity can help the governor and legislature improve higher education by providing expertise and analysis. But it will require policymakers to provide a solid foundation for its work.

California’s 1960 Master Plan for Higher Education gives the three state public higher education segments—the University of California, the California State University, and the California Community Colleges—significant autonomy. CPEC was created to help policymakers conduct long-term planning, monitor student outcomes, and oversee intersegmental policies that make it easier for students to navigate through the college and university systems. A new PPIC report looks at the strengths and weaknesses of CPEC to provide suggestions about how to make a new coordinating entity as effective as possible.

CPEC’s experience underlines the need for clear state goals and objectives. A higher education coordinating body can advocate effectively for student success and assess how well the segments are meeting the needs of the state economy. But higher education in California has changed significantly over the past several decades, and the Master Plan is either silent or outdated in important areas.

CPEC’s history also shows that the details of the coordinating entity’s design are important in giving it a strong, unified voice in the budget and policy process. A coordinating entity should be empowered to monitor whether the state’s higher education goals are being met and suggest ways to make the system more effective. When the segments fall short or when there are conflicts about how best to accomplish state goals, the coordinating entity should be able to work with the colleges, universities, and state policymakers to find workable solutions.

In this time of heightened demand for higher education, the governor and legislature could benefit from a coordinating body that acts as an honest broker in helping the state provide access to all interested students while maintaining the quality of public higher education that California is known for.

Californians Deeply Divided on Leaders—But Show Signs of Optimism

With Governor Newsom and President Trump clashing over policy and federal funding, how do Californians view the two leaders? Our January survey found that opinions of the governor and the president are very different—and very partisan. But while the partisan divide runs deep, Californians are unexpectedly hopeful about overcoming political differences and working together.

Not surprisingly, newly elected Governor Newsom is far more popular in California than President Trump. Our first reading of Governor Newsom’s approval rating came within the first few weeks of his term. A plurality of Californians said they approve of his job performance, while one in four disapproved and one in three were unsure how to rate him. Meanwhile, three in ten Californians approved of President Trump’s job performance, while two in three disapproved. This question was asked during and after the partial government shutdown in January.

Opinions of both leaders differ widely by party, but President Trump is more polarizing: nine in ten Democrats disapproved of President Trump, while a smaller share of Republicans—six in ten—disapproved of Governor Newsom. Notably, independents were twice as likely to disapprove of President Trump, compared to Governor Newsom.

figure - Independents Much More Likely to Disapprove of Trump Than Newsom

The two leaders couldn’t be in more different positions when it comes to their legislative counterparts. Governor Newsom is working with Democratic supermajorities in both houses, while President Trump has to work with a new Democratic majority in the House of Representatives and a slim Republican majority in the Senate.

Californians are optimistic that Governor Newsom and the California Legislature will be able to work together and accomplish a lot in the next year. In fact, the share of Californians who are optimistic (67%) is the highest it’s been since we began asking this question in 2006.

In contrast, Californians’ views on the likelihood of cooperation in Washington, DC, are at a record low—with just 25% of Californians optimistic. Notably, Democrats and independents are polarized, while fewer than half of Republicans are optimistic about cooperation at either level.

figure - Fewer Than Half of Republicans Optimistic Newsom and Legislature Can Work Together

Despite the rancorous political environment and the contentious relationship between Governor Newsom and President Trump, most Californians (58%) are optimistic that Americans of different political views can still come together and work out their differences. Notably, about half of Democrats (52%), Republicans (49%), and independents (52%) are optimistic these differences can be overcome. As the governor looks to advance his agenda during his first year in office, we will continue to track Californians’ perceptions of their leaders and monitor attitudes about the state and the nation.

Video: Celebrating 100 Years of Women in the California Legislature

At a recent PPIC event celebrating the centennial year of women in California’s statehouse, female legislators shared stories of how they broke through the political glass ceiling.

The session opened with a conversation between Toni Atkins, the first woman and first openly LGBTQ leader of the state senate, and Mark Baldassare, president and CEO of PPIC. Their talk ranged from the professional to the personal.

Atkins listed her top legislative priorities as emergency services and disaster preparedness. It’s a “new normal” we have to grapple with, she added. Atkins also wants to continue her focus on housing and homelessness, which she called a “humanitarian crisis.”

When Baldassare asked how the #MeToo movement might change the Sacramento culture, Atkins said change “doesn’t happen overnight” but that she wants “more than anything not to lose this moment, because . . . it may not come again for some time.”

Key to Atkins’s leadership style is to listen well and value other points of view. California has a progressive bent, but in today’s political climate, “we’ve left some voices behind,” she said.

This centennial offers a reminder that women remain underrepresented in the legislature. Although they comprise more than half of California’s likely voters (53%), they make up just 23% of its legislators. A panel of lawmakers discussed that imbalance in a conversation moderated by New York Times correspondent Jennifer Medina.

Becky Morgan, a state senator from 1985 to 1993, recalled setting up the first committee on early childhood. She was also the first female legislator to wear pants on the senate floor. It wasn’t an act of protest—it was simply “a cold January morning,” Morgan said, drawing laughter from the audience.

State senator Janet Nguyen recounted her stint as the first woman to chair the Orange County Board of Supervisors and the first to lead its meetings while pregnant—which “shocked” a few supervisors, she said. Despite the daily challenge of balancing work and family, Nguyen said, “I’m not going to give up family or career. I want both!”

All the panelists agreed that gender diversity was essential to effective state leadership. State senator Nancy Skinner agreed that we need more family-friendly policies in the state, but she emphasized that women should also champion issues related to their areas of expertise—in her case, criminal justice reform and climate change. Her view on women serving in the legislature? “It’s just right,” she argued—which led to sustained applause.

The 100th Anniversary of Women in the California Legislature

The Public Policy Institute of California is hosting a public event in Sacramento to commemorate the election of the first women to the California Legislature in 1918. Today, with Toni Atkins as the first woman in the powerful position of senate president—and in the wake of the capitol’s sexual misconduct scandals—we want to offer some reflections on the status of women in California’s statehouse.

First, it’s important to point out that the legislature has far fewer women than men at a time when women have an edge over men in voting. Women now make up slightly more than half of California’s likely voters (53%). This edge persists across racial/ethnic groups: women make up more than half of African American (57%), Latino (57%), white (52%), and Asian American (51%) likely voters. Across parties, women make up 62% of Democratic likely voters, 49% of Republican likely voters, and 44% of independent likely voters.

But the predominance of women voters is not reflected in the composition of the California Legislature. After the path-breaking elections of 100 years ago, the following decades saw relatively few women serving in the assembly. And it wasn’t until 1966 that women of color won assembly seats. A decade later, the first woman was finally elected to the state senate. The top two leadership roles in the assembly and senate were filled even more slowly. No woman held the assembly Speaker position until 1995—and that was for only three months. The next woman Speaker wasn’t elected until 2008.

Legislative term limits—passed by voters in 1990—were partially conceived as a path toward increasing diversity in the statehouse. But in the nearly 30 years since—an era that has been defined by California’s increasing ethnic and racial diversity, and Democratic leanings—there has been little change. The proportion of women in the legislature has ranged from a low of 18% in the 1991–92 session to a high of 31% in the 2005–06 session; overall, the average has hovered around 25%. A slew of recent reforms such as independent legislative redistricting, the top-two primary, and additional legislative term limit reforms—as well as efforts to encourage voter registration and voting—have had little impact.

Today, the proportion of women in the California Legislature stands at 23% and is similar in both houses. However, Republicans trail Democrats in the proportion of women legislators, with 6 women among the 38 Republican members and 22 women among the 79 Democratic members.

Surprisingly, California is a laggard in this area. Although a 2018 Rutgers University report finds that 25.4% of state legislators across the US are women, California ranks just 32nd out of the 50 states, close to the next-largest state, Texas (#35, 20.4%). Compared to our western neighbors, California is well behind Arizona (#1, 40%), Nevada (#3, 38.1%), Oregon (#8, 33.3%), and Washington (#5, 37.4%).

The lack of gender diversity in the California Legislature raises serious questions about the effects of political representation. What is the impact of the gender gap on equitable and effective policymaking? What are the greatest barriers for women in political careers? Will electing more women to legislative office provide inspiration and pathways for others—and help to build a more inclusive culture? One thing is certain: California’s current gender gap has consequences for the ability to recruit and retain top talent in the legislature today.