Gov. Schwarzenegger’s proposed constitutional amendment to protect higher education budgets and slash prison spending is the fiscal equivalent of a death-row conversion. Better late than never to see the light – but look at the mess he created.

“Spending 45 percent more on prisons than universities is no way to proceed into the future,” he said in the State of the State address. “What does it say about a state that focuses more on prison uniforms than caps and gowns? It simply is not healthy.”

University of California President Mark Yudof couldn’t have said it better.

But this from a governor who pushed through a massive bond for prison expansion, who vetoed a bill to establish a sentencing commission and who saw prison spending about double on his watch. Even now, he has resisted a federal court order to cut the prison population by 40,000 inmates, saving billions.

Schwarzenegger is proposing a constitutional amendment that would shift priorities from prisons to higher ed. That’s great, but watch his math. Under the initiative, by 2014-’15, no less than 10 percent of taxpayer money could be allocated to institutions of higher education and no more than 7 percent to state prisons. According to Schwarzenegger, it’s currently just the opposite.

But according to the California Post-Secondary Education Commission, last year the state spent about identical amounts — $10 billion – on both. The difference, I assume, is that the commission included spending on community colleges, while Schwarzenegger included only four-year universities.

Regardless, there’s no question that the trends have been out of whack. Thirty years ago, 15 percent of the state budget went to higher ed and 3 percent to prisons. Even 20 years ago, it was 2:1, 14 percent versus 7 percent. When Schwarzenegger took over, it was 11.2 percent to 6.9 percent. By last year, it was 11.1 percent to 10.9 percent. At Schwarzenegger’s prodding, the Legislature slashed prison spending this year, but expenses are running over budget.

Like governors before him, Schwarzenegger has been prisoner of tough-on-crime rhetoric that prevented him doing what was needed to control prison spending. As prison populaiton mushroomed, so did the power of the guards union over the Legislature.

The constitutional amendment would be one more case of ballot-box budgeting that enforces decisions that legislators lack the will to make. If lawmakers could pass the budget by a majority vote, instead of two-thirds, Democrats already would have overriden hard-line conservatives and pared back prison spending. The amendment wouldn’t be needed.

But at least the governor has admitted, in strong terms, that his priorities have been all wrong.

By John Fensterwald on January 6th, 2010