Killborne RR #2

            Jean Killborne's book "Can't Buy My Love: How Advertising Changes the Way We Think and Feel" uses the chapter Two Ways a Woman Can Get Hurt to open the conversation to the effects of the sex-fueled advertisements flooding the world today and how they affect us, even on a subconscious level. Killborne discusses how they are using women as figurines to glorify their products, dehumanizing women making them look more like an object for a man to use or posses. Several  models have been asked to do riskier posses that are inspired from the vast amount of pornography available on the internet sometimes even the more risky material, Killborne puts it into perspective when she writes that "Pornography is more dangerously mainstream when its glorification of rape and violence shows up in mass media, in films and television shows, in comedy and music videos, and in advertising."  Making pornography more present and visible in the world every day, exposing even the youngest of children to product endorsements where the only difference between their commercial and a pornography scene is the amount of clothes worn.... and possibly the lighting.

            All of these stereotyping and role giving advertisements are leaving the innocent, unexposed children confused with a warped moral theory of how men should be treated and how women should be treated. All of the stereotypes and the discrimination of people exploited for the sake of a trivia objects sold along with all the suggestive, provocative, and clever advertisements; I don't want my children to learn a thing from these advertisers, but how could they not pick up bits and pieces from this world of social media. Women are continually depicted as weak, fragile things that are to be possessed by man. Sexy men are seen as dominant and dangerous, getting the women no matter if she says yes or no.

            Killborne is worried about the effects these advertisements will have on children, girls more so then boys because of the violence associated towards women. Killborne has a good point to make when she says, " The most important difference is that there is no danger for most men whereas objectified women are always at risk," I do not disagree that women have seen far more abuse than their male counterpart because of being stereotyped as weak and for a man to use, but I do not think the effects advertisement has on girls is more so than the effect it has boys. I think the sexual role stereotypes of dominant males and submissive females is shown to all children at a very young age in today's world causing its own damage, but  women are more at risk for physical abuse and mental abuse because they are thought weak by their male counterpart who believe they are dominant.

             Media has in several ways become a moral compass to help guide children through their difficulties. Instead of a the child having to ask the parent to explain something, the child can see a television show on the issue. Leaving the child to learn the interpretation of the situation through the television which will contribute to the process of forming many of the stereotypes and judgments they will hold on to going into their future.

Proposition 30 Op-Ed *Final Polish*

Proposition 30

Californians have a common attitude of distrusting the lawmakers in Sacramento completely because we have been cheated by them way too many times, and we just don't know why. I personally have a hard time swallowing the political food that is forced down my throat by Sacramento. Proposition 30, however, isn't too hard to swallow, but it may be just a little too salty. I say 'too salty' because of the way Governor Jerry Brown has gone about advertising, it's like they're trying to make it look like a good idea by saying that it is the best option to help the children. They try to drive this point home making a No on Proposition 30 mean that you are in favor of a $6 billion dollar budget cut to the schools. Sacramento's budget plan for California has these 'trigger cuts', as Governor Brown refers to them, that need to be made because the state will not have money coming in through Proposition 30's tax increase which would help refund the education system, pay for Sacramento's plans for California, and reduce our incredible amount of debt. Lawmakers have already stacked budget cut after budget cut on the school system, a Yes on Proposition 30 will stop these budget cuts from happening, and keeping schools from losing three weeks from their school calendar you as well as increase to what is considered a normal sized class.  Proposition 30 is an income tax on California's richest as well as a quarter of a cent increase to the regular sales tax to raise money for the Education Protection Account to fund the education systems of California. The money originally earmarked for schools would overflow back into the General Fund to hopefully help eliminate some of our state's debt. Proposition 30 is what Sacramento needs to repair the terrible job they've done in these past few years, while saving the schools from the wrath of their budget cuts. It might be just what California needs to start us on the way out of our ocean of debt we've sunk into; but many fear that Sacramento lawmakers will just continue to drown us.

Proposition 30 is estimated to give California $6 billion annually, through an increase to the income tax on individuals whose incomes are more than $250,000. For California's wealthiest residents anyone making more than $500,000 would have an increase of 3% to their income tax, anyone above $300,000 a year will have a 2% income tax increase, and a 1% increase to the $250,000 and up bracket. That is not the only source of income coming through Proposition 30, it also has a separate sales tax increase effective on all Californians by an increase of .25% of every dollar spent, which will create almost $1.2 billion a year. Proposition 30 has advertised that it is a proposition for the schools and only for the schools, one would think that Proposition 30 would increase the amount of money received by the schools, but the bill itself does not give any extra revenue to the schools. However, the only increase to the amount of money received by the schools will happen through Proposition 98, the Official Voter Information Guide for the California General Election describes "The revenue generated by the
measure’s temporary tax increases would be included in the calculations of the Proposition 98 minimum guarantee (around fifty percent)—raising the guarantee by billions of dollars each year". Since the amount of money taken in by the state is going to increase, so will the amount of money the Education Protection Account, which is controlled by Sacramento, is able to fund California schools without need to use any of the money in the General Fund. Yes on Proposition 30 will mean a small sales tax increase, an income tax on the rich, the start of the Education Protection Account, and stopping the "trigger cuts" from taking effect.

Yes on Proposition 30 is a vote of trust in Sacramento, a vote that Californians will trust in the decisions of the lawmakers in Sacramento and that they will use any extra revenue generated from Proposition 30 in a way to better California as a whole. In my past few years as a student in the K-14 schooling system, I have become accustomed to  the schools becoming weaker and weaker as the years went by, the past four years has seen over $20 billion to California's school system. Teachers at my school took the blunt of the budget cuts having to buy their own materials to teach an effective lesson and having to worry if they're job the love doing is going to be there for them the next year. One of the teachers at my high school was cut from the schools pay-roll and officially fired, but he didn't want to leave his school and his students so he continues to work there, to this day, for free. The cuts that Sacramento was obviously making to the school systems during my time there has left me bitter, as I continue to endure the consequences of poorly funded aid  for the  Higher Education System.  Now, Sacramento is threatening the school systems with an enormous $6 billion dollar budget cut that will go into effect if Californians do not vote for Proposition 30. To have seen and experienced, first hand, how the schools have struggled through the last few budget cuts makes you realize how bad the schools would take a $6 billion dollar cut, when the past budget cuts have been much smaller than the one attached to a No on Proposition 30.  

Proposition 30's promoters, with their underhanded and vague advertizing, puts California voters in a position where they have to vote for either a tax measure that plays on peoples sympathies and drives for a better education system or cutting funds to the already struggling school system, a choice that could be considered an ultimatum to some. It's a crooked way to get a yes vote, that makes me have less trust in Sacramento's agenda and their bill.

This bill is a tax increase plain and simple, hidden behind a crusade for the schools agenda which is built on exaggerations of how helpful it will be for the California school systems. The money made through Proposition 30 will be funding the schools like the General Fund has done in the past, this will cause the General Fund to over-flow so Sacramento has more money to play their $50 billion dollar 'shell-game'. I'm hopeful, but skeptical about the positive impact that Proposition 30 will have on our education system. We might never know where the taxpayers money that over-flows from the General Fund will go if we trust Sacramento with more of our money.  

Proposition 38 mentions that around 30% of its $10 billion a year revenue would be put into effect to help get California out of its hole of debt, but these contributions would only last for a fraction of the 12 years that this proposition would be in place for. All other money raised is kept in its entirety for the schools and Early Care and Education, completely separate from the control of the government. With that said, if you really want your vote for a new tax measure to help the schools out as much as possible, and don't care to see what Sacramento has planned for California with Proposition 30, then a Yes vote on Proposition 38 would be a wise choice. That would mean a broad tax increase and that the "trigger cuts" would be activated from the No vote on Proposition 30, having the threat of budget cuts are scaring many people away from this possibility much to the benefit of Governor Jerry Brown and his proposition. Proposition 38 would make that amount back and more, according to the Official Voter Information Guide for the California General Election, Proposition 38 " increases personal income tax rates on annual earnings over $7,316 using sliding scale from .4% for the lowest individual earners to 2.2% for individuals earning over $2.5 million, for twelve years". Proposition 38 is a way to take the schools out from under the control of the government, saying "we don't trust you with our children's education anymore" and giving the power back to the schools in the most literal way possible.

According to the Los Angeles Times, "in 2011, the state budget was more than $25 billion in the red". Something needs to change in order to decrease that amount so we can start thinking of how to make California as a whole a better place instead of how we can pay off our huge pile of debt. You have two options for a new tax measure this November; Proposition 30, fixing the damage Sacramento previously caused the school system and an increase to the amount of money available in the general fund, or Proposition 38, which puts the schools ahead, even after a $6 billion dollar budget cut, by making them self-sustainable. This will separate school funds from Sacramento's budgeted agenda, allowing them 12 years of independent spending.

Governor Jerry Brown has stepped into his father's shoes, the question everyone is wondering is what he is going to do to fill them. Goldie Blumenstyk from The Chronicle of Higher Education tells us " Edmund G. (Pat) Brown was governor when the California Master Plan for Higher Education was enacted in 1960". Modeling after his father's footsteps, Gov. Brown is also the face of a crusade to help save the schools, but my worry is that he will not make a big enough impact on the schools in the long run with Proposition 30 and he will lose some of his credibility as well as tarnishing his father's name and his title as California's Governor. However, if he is able to change the direction that California is headed with this single proposition, then he will be a respected Governor for years to come for being the one who finally got our state above the water.

Proposition 30 Op-Ed

Proposition 30

Californians have a common attitude of distrusting the lawmakers in Sacramento completely because we have been cheated by them way to many times it seems, we just don't know why. I personally have a hard time swallowing the political food that is forced down my throat by Sacramento. Proposition 30, however, isn't too hard to swallow, but it may be just a little too salty. I say 'too salty' because of the way Governor Jerry Brown has gone about advertising it's like they're trying to make it look like a good idea by saying that it is the best option to help the children. They try to drive this point home making a No on Proposition 30 mean that you are in favor of a $6 billion dollar budget cut to the schools. The tax measure states these 'trigger cuts', as Governor Brown refers to them, need to be made because there will not be any money coming in through Proposition 30 to help pay for Sacramento's plans and reduce California's incredible amount of debt. Lawmakers have already stacked budget cut after budget cut on the school system, a Yes on Proposition 30 will stop schools from losing three weeks from their school calendar you as well as increase to what is considered a normal sized class.  Proposition 30 is an income tax on the rich to give to the suffering school system and a has a quarter of a cent increase to the regular sales tax, all of which goes into the Education Protection Account to fund the education system and to give money originally earmarked for schools by the government back into the general fund to help eliminate some of our state's debt. Proposition 30 is what Sacramento needs to repair the terrible job they've done in the past few years, it might be what California needs to help us out of its ocean of debt we have now sunk into; but many fear that Sacramento lawmakers will just continue to be the ones drowning us.

Proposition 30 is estimated to give California $6 billion annually, through an increase to the income tax on individuals whose incomes are more than $250,000. For California's wealthiest residents anyone making more than $500,000 would have an increase of 3% to their income tax, above $300,000 a year has a 2% income tax increase, and a 1% increase to the $250,000 and up bracket. That is not the only source of income coming through Proposition 30, it also has a separate sales tax increase effective on all Californians by an increase of .25% of every dollar spent almost $1.2 billion a year. Proposition 30 has advertised that it will be raising the money for the schools and only for the schools, one would think that Proposition 30 would increase the amount of money, but the bill itself does not give any extra revenue to the schools. A yes vote will mean a small sales tax increase, the start of the Education Protection Account that is separated from Sacramento and is able to fund California schools without using the money from  the General Fund, and it will stop the "trigger cuts" from taking effect. However, the only increase to the amount of money received by the schools will happen through Proposition 98, a ballot measure passed back in 1998 that insures that around 50% of the state's revenue will go to the schools. Now that the amount of money taken in by the state is going to increase, so will the amount of money the schools will receive from the Education Protection Account.

A Yes on Proposition 30 is a vote of trust in Sacramento, a vote that Californians will trust in the decisions of the lawmakers in Sacramento and that they will use any extra revenue generated from Proposition 30 in a way to better California as a whole. In my past few years as a student in the K-14 schooling system, I have become accustomed to  the schools becoming weaker and weaker as the years went by, the past four years seen over $20 billion to California's school system. The cuts that Sacramento was constantly  making to the school systems has left me  bitter having to endure the consequences of poorly funded aid  for the  Higher Education System.  Now, Sacramento is threatening the school systems with an enormous $6 billion dollar budget cut that will go into effect if Californians do not vote for Proposition 30. This bill is a tax increase plain and simple, hidden behind a crusade for the schools agenda which is built on exaggerations of how helpful it will be for the California school systems.

Proposition 30's proponents, with their underhanded and vague advertizing, puts California voters in a position where they have to vote for either a tax measure that is playing on peoples sympathies and drives for a better education system or cutting funds to the already struggling schools which could be considered an ultimatum to some. To have seen and experienced, first hand, how the schools have struggled through the last few budget cuts makes you realize how bad the schools would take a $6 billion dollar cut, when the past budget cuts have been even smaller than the one attached to a No on Proposition 30. It's a crooked way to get a yes vote, that makes me have less trust in Sacramento's agenda and their bill.

We won't know where the taxpayers money will go if we trust Sacramento with more of our money. The money made through Proposition 30 will be funding the schools as the general fund has been doing in the past, so now Sacramento will not have to give the schools any money from the general fund, basically giving Sacramento more money to play their $50 billion dollar 'shell-game'. I'm hopeful, but skeptical about the positive impact that Proposition 30 will have on our education system.

Proposition 38 also mentions that around 30% of its $10 billion a year revenue would be put into effect to help get California out of its hole of debt, but these contributions would only last for a fraction of the 12 years that this proposition would be in place for. All other money raised is for the schools and Early Care and Education, completely separate from the government. With that said, if you really want your vote for a new tax measure to help the schools out as much as possible, and don't care to see what Sacramento has planned for California with Proposition 30, then a Yes vote on Proposition 38 would be a wise choice. That would mean that a broad tax increase  that the "trigger cuts", $4.8 billion on the schools alone not including the other programs that would receive cuts, that  would be activated from the No vote on Proposition 30, all of the threats of budget cuts are scaring many people away from this possibility much to the benefit of Governor Jerry Brown and his proposition. Proposition 38 would make that amount back and more, according to the Official Voter Information Guide for the California General Election, Proposition 38 " increases personal income tax rates on annual earnings over $7,316 using sliding scale from .4% for the lowest individual earners to 2.2% for individuals earning over $2.5 million, for twelve years". Proposition 38 is a way to take the schools out from under the control of the government, saying "we don't trust you with our children's education anymore" and giving the power back to the schools in the most literal way possible.

According to the Los Angeles Times, "in 2011, the state budget was more than $25 billion in the red". Something needs to change in order to decrease that amount so we can start thinking of how to make California as a whole a better place instead of how we can pay off our huge pile of debt. You have two options for a new tax measure this November; Proposition 30, fixing the damage Sacramento previously caused the school system and an increase to the amount of money available in the general fund, or Proposition 38, which puts the schools ahead by making them self sustaining. This will separate school funds from Sacramento's budgeted agenda, allowing them 12 years of independent spending.

Governor Jerry Brown has stepped into his father's shoes, the questions everyone is wondering is what he is going to do to fill them. Goldie Blumenstyk from The Chronicle of Higher Education tells us " Edmund G. (Pat) Brown was governor when the California Master Plan for Higher Education was enacted in 1960". Modeling after his father's footsteps, Gov. Brown is also the face of a crusade to help save the schools, but my worry is that he will not make a big enough impact on the schools in the long run with Proposition 30 and he will lose some of his credibility as well as tarnishing his father's name and the title as California's Governor. However, if he is able to change the direction that California is headed with this single proposition, then he will be a respected Governor for years to come for being the one who finally got our state above the water.

Rough Draft #1

Californian now have a common attitude of distrusting the government completely because we feel we have been cheated by them for too long, we just don't know how. I personally have a hard time swallowing the food that is forced down my throat by Sacramento. Luckily Proposition 30 isn't too hard to swallow, maybe just a little over salted. I say over salted because of the way it is advertise is like there trying to make it look like a good idea, and that it is for the children. Then, they try to drive home this point by making a No on Proposition 30 mean you are voting for $6 billion dollar budget cut to the schools. These cuts need to be made because of California's incredible amount of debt, proposition 30 is an income taxes on the rich to give to the poor school system, and to give money originally earmarked for schools back into the general fund to help eliminate some of our state's debt.  Proposition 30 also has a quarter of a cent increase to the tax on a dollar. lawmakers have been stacking budget cut after budget cut on the cool system, Proposition 30 is saying in a reductions to education. A yes vote will stop school from losing 3 week from their school you as well as angry to what is considered a normal sized class. Proposition 30 has the  sales tax and income tax increase that Sacramento needs to repair the terrible job they've done in the past few years of holding California out of the ocean of debt we have now sunk into,  but many fear that Sacramento lawmakers will just continue to be the ones drowning us.

Proposition 30 is a vote of trust in Sacramento, a vote that Californian will believe got the lawmakers in Sacramento will use any extra revenue made from proposition 30 in a way to better California as a whole. In my past few years as a student in the K-14 schooling system, I have become accustomed to  the schools becoming weaker and weaker as the years went by. The cuts that Sacramento seemed to constantly be giving out to the school systems has left me a bitter product of a reduced High Education System.  now Sacramento is sending the school enormous $6 billion dollar budget cut if Californians do not vote for Sacramento's new tax increase. This bill is a tax increase plain and simple, hidden behind a crusade for the schools agenda which is built on exaggerations of how helpful Prop 30 will be for the California school systems.

Putting California motors in a position where they have to vote for a tax measure or cutting fun to school could be considered an ultimatum to some California who have seen and experienced, first and, the pairs of passed budget cuts even smaller than the 1 attached to a note on Proposition 30. A crooked way to get a yes vote, makes me have less trust in then and their bill.

We won't know where the taxpayers money will go if we trust Sacramento with our money again. The money generated by proposition 30 will be funding the schools as the general fund has been doing in the past, so now Sacramento will not have to give the schools money from the general fund, basically giving Sacramento more money to spend, hopefully on California.

According to the Los Angeles Times, California was more than $25 billion dollars in debt in 2011, something needs to change in order to decrease that amount so we can start thinking of how to make California a better place instead of how we can pay off our huge pile of debt. You have two options for a new tax measure this November; prop 30, fixing the damage Sacramento previously cause the school and an increase to the amount of money available in the general fund, or, prop 38, which puts the schools ahead, making the schools self sustaining with prop 38's  tax measure for a broad tax increase overall incomes varying depending on how much an individual, helping the school become separate from Sacramento, so they will not have to deal with this again for the next 12 years at least.

Proposition 30 is estimated to give California $6 billion annually, through an increase to the income tax on individual incomes of more than  $250,000 to more than $1 million in brackets between 1-3% increasing with the amount of income of California's wealthiest residents. That is not the only source of income coming in through Proposition 30 though, it also has a separate sales tax effective on all Californians by an increase of .25% of every dollar spent. Prop 30 has advertised that they will be raising the money for the schools and only for the schools, one would think that Prop 30 increase the amount of money, but the bill does not give any extra revenue to the schools. A yes vote will only stop the "trigger cuts" and form a new tax system that separately funds  the schools without using the general fund, the only increase to the amount of money received by the schools will happen through Prop 98. Prop 98 is a ballot measure passed back in 1998 that insures that around 50% of the general funds revenue will go to the schools, so now that the amount of money taken in by Sacramento will increase so will the amount of money the schools receive.

 Proposition 38 also mentions that some of its $10 billion a year revenue would be put into effect to help get California out of its hole of debt, but these contributions would only last for a fraction of the 12 years that this proposition would be in place for. All other money raised is for the schools, completely separate from the government. With that said, if you really want your vote for a new tax measure to help the schools out as much as possible, and don't care what Sacramento has planned for California with Prop 30, then a Yes vote on Proposition 38 would be a wise choice. That would mean that a broad tax increase  that the "trigger cuts" would be activated from the No vote on Prop 30, Scaring many people away from this possibility much to the benefit of Governor Jerry Brown and his proposition, but Prop 38 would make that back and more. Prop 38 is a way to take the schools out from under the control of the government, saying "we don't trust you with our children's education anymore" and giving the power back to the schools in the most literal way possible.

Governor Jerry Brown has stepped into his father's shoes, the questions everyone is wondering is what he is going to do to fill them. Edmund G. "Pat" Brown was the governor of California during the initiation of the California Master Plan for Higher Education in 1960. Modeling after his father's footsteps, Gov. Brown is also the face of a crusade to help save the schools, but my worry is that he will not make a big enough impact on the schools in the long run with Proposition 30 and he will lose some of his credibility as well as tarnishing his father's name and the title as California's Governor. However, if he is able to change the direction that California is headed with this single proposition, then he will be a respected Governor for years to come for being the one who finally got our state above the water.

Proposal

Proposition 30 is Governor Jerry Brown's first attempt to help better California in his still relatively new position, and he faces a behemoth for his first challenge, California's incredible amount of debt. Proposition 30 is income tax on the rich to give to the poor school systems, as well as helping us eliminate some of our state's debt. Lawmakers have been stacking budget cut after budget cut on the school systems, proposition 30 is saying enough reductions to education. A yes vote will stop schools from losing 3 weeks from their school year, as well as an increase what is considered a 'normal-sized' class. Proposition 30 also has a quarter of a cent increase to the tax on a dollar so that California has more money to decrease the debt of California.

A person would find little opposition saying that Sacramento lawmakers have  been doing a terrible job in the past years holding California out of the ocean of debt we have now sunk into, in fact some would say they're the ones drowning  us. Californians now have a common attitude of distrusting the government completely because we feel we have been cheated by them already in some way, we just don't know about it. I personally have a hard time swallowing the food that is forced down my throat by Sacramento. Luckily Proposition 30 isn't to disgusting to swallow, maybe just a little over salted.

I say 'over salted' because of the way it is advertised is like there trying to make it look good, that it is 'for the children'. They try to drive home this point by making a no vote on Proposition 30 mean that you are voting for a $6 billon cut to the school systems. So either you want to give the schools the sanctuary of Proposition 30 or you want to rip even more money out of the school systems damaging our future thinkers even more. It's an ultimatum on us by Sacramento, if you have any sympathy for the school system and have seen firsthand how badly any school in California have taken the recent budget cuts from Sacramento then you know that the school cannot take an outrageous $6 billon dollar cut with a grace, it will be a  broken shell of the former education system.

Proposition 30 is estimated to give California $6 billion annually, through increasing the income taxes by 1-3% on incomes more than $250,000. The income tax brackets are stated as:

Individuals making $250,000-300,000 dollars will see a 1% increase to their income tax.

Individuals making $300,000-500,000 dollars will see a 2% increase to their income tax.

Individuals making $500,000-1,000,000+ dollars will see a 3% increase to their income tax.

That is not the only money that will be coming through Proposition 30, it also has a separate sales tax increase of  .25%  on every dollar. Proposition 30 has some shady advertisement schemes and psychological tactics in order to convince a yes vote on 30. Even with those scary sides, the actions of this proposition remind me fondly of the story of Robin Hood. Proposition 30 will have a positive outcome on California as a whole, a much better result then what we would get from a no vote on Proposition 30.

Annotated Bibliography

Rivera, Carla. " School posts may be tough to fill, Impending departures of 3 chancellors come at a time of adversity in California's higher education system." Los Angeles Times (June 11, 2012): A.1. Newspaper.

With the school systems in the depth of their struggles with budget cut, within the time of a few weeks chancellors of California State University, California Community Colleges, and UC Berkeley have announced that they will be retiring from their positions, leaving a void in some of the highest ranked positions in the California education system. At a time when the school are no doubt in a dire situation waiting on the results of the voting season to see if Prop. 30 is going to pass or not, and leaving a job in need of a very skilled person to get it done successfully.

Newton, Jim. " Why is Prop. 13 Sacrosanct?" Los Angeles Times (January 9, 2012): A.11. Newspaper.

Prop 13 is from 1978 and makes houses that were brought back then keep the property tax for when it was bought and can only increase by 2% per year unless it transfers ownership or new construction is finished. Some people believe it needs to change and we to take this " chance to reform a tax system that they believe has stifled California's investment in schools and infrastructure "(Newton), other people see prop 13 as the only reason that they are able to keep their home, because it's so old that it's still covered by this tax measure. Prop 13 is old and out dated, but for some reason no one wants to touch it. However, it may be necessary to change the way the proposition works to better ourselves late down the road.

Rivera, Carla. CALIFORNIA; CSU OKs a what-if tuition hike; The increase would take effect if state voters reject the Prop. 30 tax measure." Los Angeles Times (September 20, 2012): AA3. Newspaper.

The Cal State University Board of Trustees have began making plans for their counter measures for the way that Prop 30 turns out after the voting season. They plan to do some drastic cuts of $250,000 dollars if prop 30 does not pass in order to survive budget cuts, that includes mailing some kids their money back for the next semester and rejecting them do to the schools budget cuts. of course there would also be a increase to every tuition, and even less money would be spent per student. Carla Rivera from the LA Times says " If Proposition 30 passes, Cal State would roll back a 9% tuition hike that took effect this fall. The system would have to refund tuition checks, grant tuition credit, and recalculate financial aid packages for most students."  Not to mention the 6 billion in cuts that won't happen from a yes vote on Prop 30, The schools are already struggling and have really made some drastic cuts to their staffing as well as their class selections. No more cuts can be tolerated in order to keep a well functioning school system.