Students are no longer the only ones with report cards, as the Cal State University is grading legislators based on their votes on key legislation – and some aren’t happy with their grades.
“[The scorecard is] an informational publication to provide stakeholders interested in what happens with the CSU information to show how legislators vote in relation to issues that impact the CSU,” CSU Spokesman Mike Uhlenkamp said.
Senators Leland Yee (D-San Francisco) and Joel Anderson (R-San Diego) sent a letter to Robert Linscheid, chairman of the CSU Board of Trustees in response to their grades of a “D” and “F” respectively. The letter expressed their discontent with the grade, as well as the misuse of taxpayers’ dollars for this legislative report card.
The scorecard rated legislators based on their stance on certain bills that would have affected the CSU, some of which advocated pay raises for top executives according to a press release from Yee’s office.
“He doesn’t think it’s a poor grade; actually he’s quite proud of the grade, considering who’s grading him,” Adam Keigwin, chief of staff and press secretary for Yee, said. “The chancellor gave bad marks to legislators who stood up for students and faculty.”
According to Keigwin, the scorecard system is a scam used to protect the now-retiring Chancellor Charles B. Reed and his fellow administrators.
“Most taxpayers know that Charlie Reed and the Board of Trustees have not stood up for students,” Keigwin said. “Senator Yee has a good relationship with the incoming chancellor, and believes that he will be 180 degrees different than Reed has been.”
The scorecard was used for the first time this year, according to Uhlenkamp. A system of points was used to evaluate legislators and their stance with the CSU, while last year a system of percentages was used for grading.
Not one legislator received an “A” grade from the CSU.
“Several received a ‘B+’,” Uhlenkamp said. “Due to the impact that legislators have on the system, it’s hard to be handing out ‘A’s.”
The senators who received a ‘B+’ included Alan Lowenthal (D-Long Beach), who, according to President F. King Alexander, is one legislator who truly supports the CSU.
“I think the students, faculty and the public at large want to know whether the candidates they are voting for support higher education,” Alexander said.
Alexander said that legislators who insist that they support higher education, yet vote against it, have no reason to condemn the scorecard system.
“We warned them a year ago that we were going to do it, and they are going to have the audacity to get mad about it?” Alexander said.
Alexander said that while Yee voted to prohibit additional executive pay raises in Senate Bill 967, it was only one of 32 different bills on his voting record that were used to determine his grade.
“He can be proud of [his “D” grade] all he wants,” Alexander said, “but he’ll think twice next time he says he supports education [and acts against it].”
Alexander said that other groups, such as the National Rifle Association, use a similar grading system to provide the public with assessments of supportive legislators.
“They certainly pay attention to the grades that the NRA gives them,” Alexander said. “Why don’t they pay attention to the grades the CSU gives them?”
Uhlenkamp said that there has been some conversation about the scorecard and its usefulness, but the only two who voiced displeasure were Anderson and Yee. He said there are no prospects of revising or replacing this legislative scoring system in future years.