With 7.1 million people, Georgia is the tenth most populous state
in the country and the smallest of the seven states in this study
of governance structures. Georgia has grown significantly over
the last two decades. The Olympic games, accompanied by a strong
economy and a substantial in-migration (particularly into the
Atlanta metropolitan area), have made Georgia one of the most
economically vibrant of the 50 states over the past several years.
As Table 1 indicates, Georgia has one of the lowest per capita
incomes (at $21,300) of any of the seven states in this study,
but it also has a lower-than-average percentage of its population
in poverty. Georgians are about average relative to other study
states in terms of the percentage of its population with a baccalaureate
or professional degree, as well as the number of new high school
graduates per 1,000 population.
Contextual Variables for Georgia Compared to Selected States (Numbers in Percentages Represent Rank Among the Seven Study States) |
||||
(1-2) |
(3-5) |
(6-7) |
||
| Population (in Millions) (1995) | ||||
| Per Capita Income (in Thousands) (1995) | ||||
| Potential Tax Revenue (1995-96)** | ||||
| New High School Graduates per 1,000 Population (1995-96)* | ||||
| Role of Private Higher Education§ | ||||
| Role of Governor* | ||||
| % of Population with Associate Degree (1990) | ||||
| % of Population with Baccalaureate Degree (1990) | ||||
| % of Population with Graduate or Professional Degree (1990) | ||||
| % of Population 24 Years Old or Younger (1995) | ||||
| % of Population that is Anglo (1990) | ||||
| % of Population Who Do Not Speak English in Home (1990) | ||||
| % of Population in Poverty (1994) | ||||
| High School Dropout Rate (1992 to 1994 Average) | ||||
| * This figure is expressed as an Index: National Average = 100.
Sources: Unless otherwise noted, data are drawn from Chronicle of Higher Education Almanac 43, no. 1 (September 1996), pp. 51-52. |
||||
Throughout our interviews, "change" was the word used most often
to describe the current environment in Georgia. According to individuals
we interviewed, the state is "in transition," "changing rapidly,"
and "in a period of evolution." Some of this transformation is
due to in-migration from across the country. Changes have also
been occurring because of the spotlight that the 1996 summer Olympics
brought to the state. The excitement generated by the Olympics,
the World Series (Atlanta won the title in 1995) and the strong
economy created a very upbeat environment for almost everyone
we spoke with during our site visits.
State demographics are reflecting a population shift from rural
to urban areas, due particularly to the growth of corporate headquarters
in Atlanta, such as CNN, Delta Airlines, UPS, and Coca Cola. The
population of Georgia is heavily concentrated in the northern
part of the state, especially the Atlanta area. This is also the
part of the state that is growing most rapidly. Georgia experienced
growth rates of close to 20 percent in the 1980s, and is expected
to continue to grow, adding an additional 900,000 residents in
each of the next three decades. The southern part of the state
is growing, but not nearly at the same rate as the north. The
differences between regions of the state was characterized by
one politician who said, "Take Atlanta out of Georgia and you
would have Mississippi." There are many divisions in the state,
including urban-rural, north-south, and sub-regional ones, that
make any type of statewide coordination complex. The changing
nature of the demographics transforms the expectations for higher
education as well.
Almost everyone we spoke with agreed that in Georgia, education in general and higher education in particular have recently been the beneficiaries of a strong economy and a supportive Governor. A state that has historically not shown a great deal of support for higher education (over 80 percent of Georgia citizens do not complete any formal educational program beyond high school) Georgia is now shifting new resources into higher education and trying to raise aspirations and expectations of students to enter the state's colleges and universities.
To address potential revenue declines, the Governor called on
all state agencies in the 1996 budget process to develop a proposal
to redirect five percent of their budgets. All agencies were to
find five percent of their previous year's budget that could be
eliminated; then, they were to propose how they would reinvest
that five percent in their highest priority areas. In their overall
budget request, agencies were directed to ask for no more than
a 6.5 percent increase (the estimated rate of economic growth)
over their budget for the previous fiscal year; salaries and capital
projects were not included as part of this limit. Depending on
how the Governor and General Assembly assessed their redirection
of funds, agencies could expect to receive from 95 to 106.5 percent
of the previous year's budget.
After the decline in state appropriations in the early 1990s,
the University System of Georgia enjoyed increases in state appropriations
of 6, 13 and 20 percent for fiscal years 1993, 1994 and 1995,
respectively. Table 2 shows the amount and percentage of the state
budget for the University System of Georgia for selected years.
State Appropriations and Percent of State Budget For the University System of Georgia (Selected Years Only) |
||||
| State Appropriations (In Millions) | $634.6 | $913.3 | $1,061.3 | $1,274.6 |
| Percent of State Budget | 14.5% | 11.9% | 11.5% | 12.5% |
| Source: University System of Georgia, Information Digest 1994-95 (Atlanta: 1996), p. 71. | ||||
Several observers noted that Miller has been able to take political
issues away from his opponents. One example is privatization,
an issue that has been widely portrayed as backed by Republicans,
but one that Miller has taken into his own hands. Miller formed
a commission to examine privatization in early 1995. Under the
Miller administration, parks, computer services, medical facilities,
and prisons are all candidates for privatization. Privatization
talk has spread to higher education as well, according to several
respondents, and there have been some discussions of privatizing
the state's student aid agency.
A second example of Miller's taking "Republican" issues as his
own is the recently enacted tax cut; the General Assembly in 1995
passed a tax cut proposal at the very last hour only to have it
vetoed by the Governor on the grounds that it was unconstitutional.
However, it was clear at that time that the tax cut issue would
be back in 1996, this time as the Governor's initiative. The Governor
did propose a tax reduction package in January 1996 that was swiftly
passed by the Assembly.
While the Governor's office in Georgia is said to have only moderate
power constitutionally, the Governor can have a great deal of
influence over higher education, according to most individuals
we spoke with. Specifically, the Governor appoints the members
of the Board of Regents, the statewide governing board for the
University System of Georgia. In addition, the Governor has significant
influence over the amount of money that higher education receives
during the budget process. Governor Miller and others have been
referred to as "education Governors" who have made a real difference
for higher education. A long-time university administrator said
that when Georgia has had a Governor that understood higher education,
things have happened. Many attributed Miller's experience as a
college professor before entering politics as one reason that
he has been so supportive of higher education. His second inaugural
speech focused exclusively on education issues. One legislator
said, "He has a commitment to education that is not just political
rhetoric." This commitment is most evident in his designation
of lottery funds to education, and specifically through his creation
of the HOPE scholarship program, which has now become a model
for a national scholarship effort.
General Assembly
The General Assembly (the formal name for the Georgia Legislature)
consists of 236 legislators, including 56 senators and 180 representatives.
All seats are up for reelection every two years. In 1995-96, both
houses had a Democratic majority (35 to 21 in the Senate and 114
to 66 in the House), though the Republicans gained significant
numbers of seats in the 1994 elections. The General Assembly is
in session 40 days every year.
According to one respondent, the high turnover of legislators
over the last four to six years has left no towering figures for
higher education in the General Assembly. In general, however,
the Assembly was described as supportive of higher education.
The key positions in the General Assembly for higher education,
according to one legislative staff member, include the Speaker
of the House, the Lieutenant Governor, the chairs of the Appropriations
Committees, and the chairs of the Higher Education Committees.
According to one University System representative, the Governor
and General Assembly have a significant influence on higher education
because they "are responsible for funding the system and for setting
the expectations of the public."
At the time of our visit there was a good relationship between
the University System of Georgia and the General Assembly, and
reportedly good communication between the chancellor of the University
System and the key legislators. Essentially, the University System
is responsible for lobbying; although institutional presidents
talk to their own representatives, they typically do so in the
name of the system.
The Appropriations Committees in both houses have the most direct
impact on higher education because this is where the budget deals
are made. The Higher Education Committee in each chamber (in the
House this is called the University System of Georgia Committee)
technically has responsibility for policy issues, although in
practice the Appropriations Committees, through their budget powers,
also exert influence over policy matters. Each Appropriations
Committee is divided into subcommittees for various areas of the
budget, and typically the chair of the Higher Education Committee
in each chamber chairs the Appropriations Subcommittee for the
University System. This gives the chair of the Higher Education
Committee more influence over higher education than similar positions
have in most other states, where Higher Education Committees are
disconnected from the appropriations process.
In general, however, the Assembly does not have that much influence
in higher education, largely due to the constitutional status
of the University System of Georgia. Because the system has constitutional
autonomy, the only real levers are in cases of new money or new
initiatives. According to one legislator, "The Higher Education
Committee does not handle much legislation."
Because of constitutional autonomy, legislators and university administrators tend to agree that the Assembly has "kept its meddling in higher education to a minimum" and that it respects the authority and responsibilities of the Board of Regents. One legislator said, however, that the Assembly needs to do a better job of holding institutions accountable for the money they spend, even though the institutions have constitutional autonomy. "We don't have the oversight we should have from a policy perspective," he said. "We could be stronger within our existing system." Another legislator suggested that while there has not been much scrutiny of the money that was spent in previous years in higher education, those kinds of questions will soon be asked by legislators who want to see results. The chancellor has tried to anticipate these expectations by presenting a voluntary annual accountability report.
[ DOWNLOAD | CONTENTS | PREVIOUS | NEXT ]
[ HOME | REPORTS | CROSSTALK | RESOURCES | ORDER ]