Burning Down the House: Politics, Governance, and Affirmative Action at the University of California (review)

In recent years the University of California (UC) has been at the center of many controversies, most notably the on-going, high-profile debate on the use of race and ethnicity in higher education decision-making. While the impact of this decision has been studied and analyzed in many ways (e.g., Guerrero, 2003; Jewell, 2000; Karabel, 1999), Brian Pusser skillfully uses the example of the University of California during this controversy as a case study in Burning Down the House: Politics, Governance, and Affirmative Action at the University of California to reconsider common understandings of higher education policymaking, organization, and governance.

Specifically, he examines the increased societal demands placed on the university and its concurrent use in national political maneuvering, despite its historically autonomous position. Ultimately, Pusser offers a new framework to understand public universities and the political situations in which they find themselves, highlighting what is useful about current models of the behavior of organizations while simultaneously examining what these models are missing. Only through such an approach, Pusser suggests, can we truly identify, examine, and understand the current political reality that is increasingly surrounding higher education policymaking.

To make his case, Pusser presents the relevant history of the University of California, as well as a detailed account of the events leading up to and including the historic UC Regents vote that ended affirmative action in the university system. Even though this has been a subject and time period followed closely by many interested in higher education policy, Pusser provides an in-depth view of the situation, sharing many details and nuances generally unknown to those who followed this debate. The telling of this story alone makes for an interesting book.

The point of telling this story, however, is to shed light on the changing nature of higher education policymaking and the increasingly political environment in which higher education finds itself. Examining the affirmative action debate within the University of California, Pusser highlights the unprecedented role of the UC Regents as well as the various individuals, organizations, and constituencies that entered the debate—ranging from the president of the United States to University of California students. Emphasizing the various opinions and interests that factored into the discussion, many of which were outside the normal boundaries of higher education decision-making, Pusser underscores the critical role of resistance by those usually excluded from policymaking. In addition, Pusser discusses both the direct and indirect effects of the results of the UC Regents' extensive involvement in UC governance, including changes to university admissions policies, reactions from the state in the form of new legislation, greater attention to the regent confirmation process, and the election of a Democratic governor.

While Pusser makes his argument and clearly spells out in the last chapter how the University of California is an excellent example from which to learn about the politics now surrounding higher education, I was left wanting additional commentary from the author. In particular, how widespread is this phenomenon? In other words, is this something that is unique to California because of the dynamics of the state or the governing structure of the university? What about other states or other governing structures? In addition, while Pusser makes sure to emphasize that this is a case study of an elite public university, are there any implications for other sectors of higher education? Furthermore, since the case actually focuses on a public university system, what are the implications for institutions that stand alone and do not have the flexibility and resources a system such as the UC provides?

I also believe the book would have benefited from an epilogue, especially considering Pusser's argument that this type of higher education policymaking and politics is the wave of the future. The case study ends with the 2001 vote by the Regents of the University of California to rescind SP-1...