July 2, 2007
California needs more nurses, not more lawyers
As the University of California, Irvine presses its case for a brand new law school despite an official finding that California's supply of lawyers is more than adequate, there is a genuine and urgent need to train more nurses. Dan Walters, the pre-eminent Sacramento columnist, who joined me in opposing the US Irvine law school boondoggle, today compares the need for nurses with the lack of need for lawyers, and wonders why the university flouts the public good.
Even though there's been a significant increase in training programs in recent years, the state has an estimated 17,000 qualified nursing applicants on schools' waiting lists.The Legislature's budget analyst, Elizabeth Hill, issued a report on the state's looming shortage of nurses in May, noting that the University of California, in a study by its San Francisco medical school, forecast a demand for registered nurses in 2014 that's 40,000 higher than the current forecast of supply, given retirement and other factors.Demand will continue to outpace supply, at least from in-state sources, as baby-boom generation nurses retire and they and other members of that immense cohort require more nursing care.
If the University of California is to continue to receive lavish public support, it should learn to respect the needs of the public. The resources being squandered on a redundant law school should be directed to addressing a very real need for more nurses. UC Irvine claims it has raised outside funds for the Law School, but of course there is the opportunity cost of not pursuing a desperately-needed school of nursing. Land, staff time, and fund raising efforts are, of course, finite.
Academia is known for its arrogance, but this takes the cake.
Academia is known for its arrogance, but this takes the cake.
FOLLOW US ON
Recent Articles
- New York Greenlights Quarantine Camps
- Reality Check for Democrats
- A MAGA Siege of the Democrats’ Deep State
- Why Incel and 4B Culture Matter
- Defending Donald Trump: A Response to Jeffrey Goldberg and The Atlantic on the Signal Leak
- Are Judges Complicit in Lawfare?
- Deep Dive: The Signal Chat Leak
- Mark Steyn’s Reversal of Fortune
- Where We Need Musk’s Chainsaw the Most
- Trump Is Not Destroying the Constitution, but Restoring It
Blog Posts
- Democrats should get a clue from the Palestinians who are now marching against Hamas
- Trump takes on Fauxahontas's brainchild
- Consumer Sentiment Survey: This too shall pass
- If they only had knife control....
- Newsom and Walz struggle to appear normal
- Anti-Trump lawfare: yes, it's a conspiracy
- Criminal attack? You're on your own.
- Amid disaster, watch Bangkok clean up and rebuild
- Katherine Maher shoots herself, and NPR, in the foot
- A visit to DOGE
- You just might be a Democrat if ...
- Yahoo Finance writer says Trump’s tariffs will see America driving Cuban-style antique cars
- Kristi Noem and the prison cell
- Dividing the Democrats
- April 2nd: Liberation Day and Reconciliation Day don’t mix