For the most part, student activists got it right on Monday. Unlike last year, the demonstration in support of higher education in Sacramento passed without major incident, allowing focus to remain on students’ lobbying efforts. At the same time, though, the event may indicate that student activism is facing something of an identity crisis.
An estimated 2,000 people converged on the state Capitol, rallying and lobbying state legislators to address student needs. As opposed to the raucous 2012 events, which saw a much larger turnout and involved the arrest of around 70 demonstrators after they occupied the Capitol building, this year, students were able to focus more on their message without the distraction of out-of-hand protests. They applied the kind of political pressure to which state officials are most likely to be receptive.
In that sense, the day was a necessary reminder that students cannot became too complacent because of Proposition 30’s success — there are still reasons to protest. Now that the UC and CSU systems have avoided immediate peril, it would be easy for students to be satisfied, as the threat of a steep tuition hike and sharp cuts to services is no longer imminent. But the students who went to Sacramento, including many UC Berkeley student leaders, rightfully recognize that there is more work to be done.
First and foremost, Prop. 30 does nothing to solve the university’s long-term financial instability, as its tax increases are only temporary. There is no guarantee that tuition will not continue to skyrocket down the road. As they did on Monday, students must continue to let their state representatives know that the university needs big ideas to restore its financial health. Furthermore, some of Sacramento’s plans for the UC system, like imposing unit caps to shorten the time it takes for students to graduate, are worrisome. The more state officials hear students’ concerns, the more likely we are to see change.
Yet Monday also showed that student activists need to work on making their message more specific in the post-Prop. 30 period. There is no large threat to rally against, no widespread Occupy movement to tap into and no proposition to campaign for. Reinvestment in higher education is too broad of an idea — students need to focus on organizing around clearer policy proposals.
Refining the message of the student movement should also encourage more people to get involved. In the future, honing in on targeted policy measures will allow the movement to increase student participation. Individual campuses could get more involved, putting together phone banks or similar events in tandem with Sacramento demonstrations.
While demonstrators can do a better job furthering their goals through more specific measures, their overall message is spot-on: Problems remain with the state’s approach to public higher education. The battle is far from over.