BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON
BUSINESS, PROFESSIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Senator Jerry Hill, Chair
2015 - 2016 Regular
Bill No: SB 1059 Hearing Date: April 4,
2016
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Author: |Monning |
|----------+------------------------------------------------------|
|Version: |February 16, 2016 |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
|Urgency: |No |Fiscal: |Yes |
----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Consultant|Sarah Mason |
|: | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Postsecondary education: Title 38 awards
SUMMARY: Exempts law schools accredited by the State Bar of
California Committee on Bar Examiners from requirements that
they be accredited by an accrediting agency recognized by the
United States Department of Education in order to receive Title
38 veterans benefits.
Existing law:
1) Establishes the Title 38 Funding Program (Title 38 Program)
under the administration of the California State Approving
Agency for Veterans Education (CSAAVE) and requires CSAAVE to
approve qualifying institutions desiring to enroll veterans
or persons eligible for Title 38 awards. In order to be a
qualifying institution, requires an institution offering
degrees to comply with the following requirements:
a) Provide information (including via a website link) on
where to access California license examination passage
rates for the most recent available year from graduates of
its undergraduate programs leading to employment for which
passage of a California licensing examination is required,
if that data is electronically available through the
website of a California licensing or regulatory agency.
b) Provide evidence of accreditation by an accrediting
agency recognized by the United States Department of
SB 1059 (Monning) Page 2
of ?
Education (USDE) of the institution and of all degree
programs. For unaccredited degree granting institutions
participating in the Title 38 Program as of January 1,
2015, obtain and provide evidence to CSAAVE of its
candidacy or preaccreditation status, with an accrediting
agency recognized by USDE by January 1, 2016 in order to
maintain eligibility for the program and obtain and provide
evidence to CSAAVE of accreditation from the accrediting
agency with which it had candidacy or preaccreditation
status by January 1, 2017 in order to maintain eligibility.
(Education Code (EDC) §§ 67100, 67101, 67102)
1) Authorizes the Board of Trustees of the State Bar of
California (Board) to establish an examining committee
(Committee of Bar Examiners, CBE) to examine all applicants
for admission to practice law, administer the requirements
for admission
to practice law and certify to the Supreme Court for admission
to the bar those applicants who fulfill the requirements.
(Business and Professions Code (BPC § 6046)
2) Provides that subject to the approval of the Board, the CBE
may adopt such reasonable rules and regulations as may be
necessary or advisable for the purposes of making effective
the qualifications for admission to the practice of law in
California. (BPC § 6047)
3) In order to be to be certified to the Supreme Court for
admission and a license to practice law, requires a person,
who has not been admitted to practice law in a sister state,
United States jurisdiction, possession, territory, or
dependency or in a foreign country to, among other
requirements: (BPC § 6060)
a) Before beginning the study of law, complete at least two
years of college work, attained in apparent intellectual
ability the equivalent of at least two years of college
work by taking any examinations in subject matters and
achieving the scores as are prescribed by the CBE.
b) Register with the CBE as a law student within 90 days
after beginning the study of law.
SB 1059 (Monning) Page 3
of ?
c) Have been conferred a juris doctor (J.D.) degree or a
bachelor of laws degree by a State Bar accredited law
school or American Bar Association (ABA) accredited law
school or studied law diligently and in good faith for at
least four years in a law school that is authorized or
approved to confer professional degrees and requires
classroom attendance of its students for a minimum of 270
hours a year or demonstrates education, experience and
qualifications based on a legal education in a foreign
state or country or studied law in a law office in
California and under the personal supervision of a member
of the State Bar who is, and for at least the last five
years continuously has been, engaged in the active practice
of law or studied law in the chambers and under the
personal supervision of a judge of a court of record of
this state or studied law at a correspondence law school
authorized or approved to confer professional degrees by
this state, which requires 864 hours of preparation and
study per year for four years or any combination of these
methods.
1) Requires the CBE to adopt rules for the regulation and
oversight of unaccredited law schools that are required to be
authorized to operate as a business in California and to have
an administrative office in California, including
correspondence schools, that are not State Bar accredited or
ABA accredited with the goal of ensuring consumer protection
and a legal education at an affordable cost. (BPC § 6046.7)
2) Provides that the CBE is responsible for the approval,
regulation, and oversight of degree-granting law schools that
exclusively offer bachelor's, master's, or doctorate degrees
in law, such as a J.D. (BPC § 6060.7)
3) Requires a law school that is not State Bar accredited to
provide students with a disclosure statement signed by the
student containing all of the following information:
a) The school is not accredited. However, in addition, if
the school has been approved by other agencies, that fact
may be so stated.
SB 1059 (Monning) Page 4
of ?
b) Where the school has not been in operation for 10 years,
the assets and liabilities of the school unless the school
has had prior affiliation with another school that has been
in operation more than 10 years, has been under the control
of another school that has been in operation more than 10
years, or has been a successor to a school in operation
more than 10 years.
c) The number and percentage of students who have taken and
who have passed the first-year law student's examination
(Baby Bar) and the final bar examination in the previous
five years, or since the establishment of the school,
whichever time is less, which shall include only those
students who have been certified by the school to take the
examinations.
d) The number of legal volumes in the library.
e) The educational background, qualifications, and
experience of the faculty, and whether or not the faculty
members and administrators (e.g., the dean) are members of
the California State Bar.
f) The ratio of faculty to students for the previous five
years or since the establishment of the school, whichever
time is less.
g) Whether or not the school has applied for accreditation,
and, if so, the date of application and whether or not that
application has been withdrawn, is currently pending, or
has been finally denied.
h) That the education provided by the school may not
satisfy the requirements of other states for the practice
of law. (BPC § 6061)
1) Exempts law schools that are ABA accredited and State Bar
accredited from the California Private Postsecondary
Education Act (Act) and oversight by the Bureau for Private
Postsecondary Education (BPPE). (EDC § 94874 (g))
2) Requires unaccredited degree granting institutions currently
approved by BPPE to submit an accreditation plan to the
Bureau by July 1, 2015, to obtain preaccreditation by July 1,
SB 1059 (Monning) Page 5
of ?
2017, to obtain accreditation by July 1, 2020, and to comply
with various student disclosure and visiting committee review
requirements. (EDC § 94885.1)
3) Prohibits an institution approved by BPPE from offering an
associate, baccalaureate, master's, or doctoral degree
without disclosing to prospective students prior to
enrollment whether the institution or the degree program is
unaccredited and any known limitation of the degree,
including, but not limited to, whether a graduate of the
degree program will be eligible to sit for the applicable
licensure exam in California and other states, a statement
that reads: "A degree program that is unaccredited or a
degree from an unaccredited institution is not recognized for
some employment positions, including, but not limited to,
positions with the State of California." And that a student
enrolled in an unaccredited institution is not eligible for
federal financial aid programs. (EDC § 94897 (p))
This bill: Exempts law schools that are State Bar accredited
from having to receive accreditation by an accrediting agency
recognized by USDE in order to participate in the Title 38
Program.
FISCAL
EFFECT: Unknown. This bill is keyed "fiscal" by Legislative
Counsel.
COMMENTS:
1.Purpose. This bill is sponsored by the Association of
California Accredited Law Schools . According to the Author,
SB 1059 will reestablish the ability of California law schools
that are State Bar accredited to receive GI Benefits from
veteran students seeking a legal education. The Author states
that these schools have been eligible to serve veteran
students for over four decades, until an oversight in
legislation in 2014 which rendered the schools ineligible to
receive Title 38 benefits. The Author states that the pool of
19 schools which are not ABA accredited tend to serve a
student population made up of older, working students with
families. According to the Author, the ABA's stringent
SB 1059 (Monning) Page 6
of ?
facility and faculty requirements for accreditation are often
cost-prohibitive for these smaller, regionally based law
schools and notes that as a result, these schools are
subsequently forced to seek accreditation through either
private accrediting bodies or the State Bar. The Author is
concerned that without a correction to the law, working
veterans and veterans with families will be restricted from
attending a law school in their region. The Author cites the
example of Monterey College of Law, and its branch in San Luis
Obispo, as the only options for veterans who want to pursue a
legal education on the Central Coast and would not be able to
without the necessary amendment to current law contained in
this bill. According to the Author, the Monterey area has a
huge veteran population due the number of military
installations in the county, and veterans seeking a local and
less-expensive option for a legal education will be forced to
uproot their lives and families, and move to an area where a
more expensive ABA accredited institution or one accredited by
a USDE recognized accrediting agency that can accept their
Title 38 benefits. The Author also notes the experience of
veterans attending Northern School of Law based in Chico which
is one of the only law schools in the area from Sacramento to
the Oregon border that can accommodate the population of
students balancing legal studies with work and other aspects
of their life. The Author notes that veterans who live in
Northern California would almost certainly be forced to move
to receive a legal education, if this school lost its Title 38
eligibility.
2.Title 38. The GI Bill, signed in 1944 by President Franklin
D. Roosevelt gave "servicemen and women the opportunity of
resuming their education or technical training after
discharge, or of taking a refresher or retrainer course, not
only without tuition charge up to $500 per school year, but
with the right to receive a monthly living allowance while
pursuing their studies." Educational benefits are currently
available both to active duty personnel and veterans through
two key programs: the Tuition Assistance program administered
and run by the Department of Defense (DOD) and the Post-9/11
Veterans Educational Assistance Act administered by the
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). According to data from
the National Center for Education Statistics during FY 2011,
923,836 U.S. service members received over $10 billion in
assistance from educational benefit programs administered by
SB 1059 (Monning) Page 7
of ?
the VA, with 88.420, or 9.6 percent, living in California.
The former Bureau for Private Postsecondary and Vocational
Education (BPPVE) used to serve as the approval agency for
California institutions attended by veterans using Title 38
monies under a contract with the VA. When BPPVE expired,
these duties were transferred to the California Department of
Veterans Affairs (Cal-Vets) which now provides oversight of
postsecondary education programs through CSAAVE. CSAAVE is
federally funded and operates under an annual reimbursement
contract with the VA. In its role as the approval agency, the
primary function of CSAAVE is to review, evaluate and approve
quality educational and training programs for veteran's
benefits. CSAAVE is intended to approve colleges and
universities, vocational schools, business schools,
professional schools, and licensing and certification training
and tests, all of which must lead to an educational,
professional or vocational objective.
Stemming from concerns about the experience of veterans at
private for-profit institutions and multiple reports and
hearings highlighting false and predatory advertising to
veterans and the potential lack of accountability for the
millions of dollars administered by the federal Veterans
Administration (VA) and Department of Defense (DOD) spent at
private postsecondary education institutions in California if
schools are not regulated, the Legislature took steps in 2014
to increase accountability and program quality of institutions
receiving Title 38 monies. AB 2099 (Frazier, Chapter 676,
Statutes of 2014) stipulated new Title 38 veterans funding
eligibility standards for postsecondary institutions in
California. All institutions now must provide license
examination passage rates to students, and institutions that
offer degrees must have institutional and programmatic
accreditation in order to receive Title 38 monies. The bill
also provided that, in order for a postsecondary institution
to be determined eligible to accept Title 38 monies,
determined by CSAAVE, the postsecondary institution, whether
it offers degrees or not, must either be a public school, a
nonprofit school, approved by the Bureau or be regionally
accredited. SB 1247 (Lieu, Chapter 840, Statutes of 2014)
prohibited an institution, beginning January 1, 2016, from
claiming an exemption from the California Private
Postsecondary Education Act and Bureau oversight if the
SB 1059 (Monning) Page 8
of ?
institution is approved to participate in the Title 38
Program.
3.Law School Approval by the State Bar. Most law schools in
California are approved by the ABA, which also deems them
State Bar accredited. The State Bar also "accredits" 20 law
schools that are neither ABA accredited nor accredited by an
accrediting agency recognized by USDE pursuant to rules
adopted by the CBE and approved by the Board of the State Bar.
The role of the State Bar in accrediting law schools goes
back some 80 years when the Board first evaluated the program
of legal education at "fixed-facility" law schools in the
state at that time. Legislation in 1937, known as the Act
Governing Admission to Practice, subsequently established the
educational requirements for admission to the Bar which
included graduation from a law school accredited by the CBE
that required substantially the full-time of its students for
three years, graduation from a law school accredited by the
CBE that required only a portion of full-time students or
studying law diligently and in good faith for at least four
years. The Legislation also created the requirement that
students who did not attend a CBE accredited law school, had
to pass a preliminary examination as determined by the CBE
during the course of their law studies.
The State Bar enacted rules to implement the new authorities
for the CBE, relying primarily on cumulative Bar passage rate
of a specified percent to determine eligibility for State Bar
accreditation. However, CBE also retained the option to grant
accreditation, and could continue a law school's
accreditation, even if the school did not meet the standard
(60 percent was the last rate before CBE began relying on ABA
passage rate requirements), if a law school could demonstrate
that it was maintaining substantially the same standards of
instruction, facilities for study, admission requirements, and
curriculum as were maintained by CBE accredited law schools
that met the CBE's cumulative Bar examination pass rate
standard. CBE further attempted to enhance its accreditation
standards beyond just reliance on cumulative Bar passage rate
to include quantitative standards (that an accredited law
school maintain a certain minimum number of books in its law
library, employ a minimum of 3 full-time instructors, and
admit no more than 10 percent of its student body as students
who did not have at least two years of college education), but
SB 1059 (Monning) Page 9
of ?
was met with opposition from State Bar accredited law schools.
CBE's final rules then required a CBE accredited law school
to have an adequate library, have an adequately trained
faculty devoting sufficient time to teaching and consultation
with students to ensure adequate personal acquaintance and
influence with the students and special students could
constitute up to one-third of its enrollment.
Concerns about the quality of the legal education being
offered by California's unaccredited and correspondence law
schools resulted in the adoption of a Supreme Court Rule
(former Rule 957), which required unaccredited and
correspondence law schools to register with CBE, comply with
specified requirements, and file specified reports.
Continuing concerns about the quality of education at
unaccredited and correspondence law schools led to further
study of this issue and a report recommending that only CBE
and ABA school graduates be allowed to qualify to take the Bar
examination, however the recommendation was never formally
pursued in terms of statutory or CBE rules. The State Bar
further found in the mid 1980s that some ABA-approved law
schools and many CBE accredited law schools faced declining
Bar examination pass rates, declining numbers of applicants
for admission as well as serious financial problems. These
State Bar accredited law schools were exempt from any other
regulation and oversight in California.
When the Private Postsecondary and Vocational Education Reform
Act of 1989 (Former Act) took effect, only ABA approved law
schools and State Bar law schools that were also WASC
accredited were authorized to continue an exemption from state
regulation. Beginning January 1, 1990, most State Bar
accredited law schools were subject to concurrent regulation
by the California Council for Private Postsecondary and
Vocational Education (Council) and the CBE. The Council
promulgated regulations applicable to all private
postsecondary institutions, including private law schools.
The CBE and Council then worked together, given the role CBE
had in accrediting law schools, to ensure that CBE focused on
curriculum approval and content while the Council focused on
student protections and fair business practices. State Bar
accredited law schools were then specifically exempted from
oversight under the BPPVE in 1997 in the Education Code
through language that mirrors current BPC § 6060.7 referenced
SB 1059 (Monning) Page 10
of ?
above. When the Former Act and BPPVE expired, BPC § 6060.7
took effect and subsequently § 6046.7 gave CBE the express
authority, on and after January 1, 2008, to regulate and
oversee unaccredited law schools, including correspondence law
schools, that are neither ABA or State Bar accredited.
The current rules governing State Bar accreditation of law
schools, which took effect in 2009, are contained in Division
2, Accredited Law School Rules of Title 4, of the Admissions
and Educational Standards and provide the guidelines for the
governance, administration, curriculum requirements, academic
and admission policies a school must abide by. They include:
Acknowledgement that CBE does not intervene in
disputes between a student and law school.
The ability of CBE to provide information publicly,
upon written request (Rule 4.108 outlines that certain
portions of applications, summaries of inspection reports
and portions of annual reports may be made available upon
written request).
Application requirements, including an inspection
visit.
Annual compliance report requirements.
Self-study prior to a periodic inspection.
Notification to CBE of a major change.
Actions taken for noncompliance and action for
termination of accreditation.
1.Evaluating Institutional and Program Quality. Accreditation
is a voluntary, non-governmental peer review process used to
determine academic quality. Under federal law, USDE
establishes the general standards for accreditation agencies
and is required to publish a list of recognized accrediting
agencies that are deemed reliable authorities on the quality
of education provided by their accredited institutions. While
accredited and unaccredited education and training programs
are currently allowed to operate in California, only
accredited institutions are authorized to participate in
SB 1059 (Monning) Page 11
of ?
federal and state financial aid programs. Degrees earned from
institutions that are not accredited additionally may limit a
student's career options and opportunities to receive
reciprocity from other state licensing boards.
There are two different types of accreditation, regional and
national. Each of the six USDE-recognized regional
accrediting agencies oversees public and the vast majority of
non-profit private (independent) postsecondary educational
institutions in the region it serves. California's regional
accrediting agency is the Western Association of Schools and
Colleges (WASC). National accreditation is not based on
geography, but more focused to evaluate specific types of
schools and colleges. For example, the Accrediting Commission
of Career Schools and Colleges examines career-focused
programs. The Distance Education and Training Council
accredits colleges that offer distance education. The idea
behind national accreditation is to allow nontraditional
colleges (trade schools, religious schools, certain online
schools) to be compared against similarly designed
institutions. Different standards and categories are
measured, depending on the type of school in question.
Accreditation is the accepted standard for educational
degrees. Accrediting bodies, as pointed out in a 2013 report
issued by the Legislative Analyst's Office, are good at
assessing the quality of educational programs and gathering
knowledgeable subject matter experts to assess content, rigor,
currency, and delivery of educational programs. They have also
been good at keeping up with emerging trends in education and
incorporating them into their reviews. While the accrediting
process is not perfect, as highlighted by the unlawful
activities of institutions accredited by some accrediting
agencies, and does not focus on fair business practices that
can impact a student's success, accreditation is designed to
provide a baseline measure of the quality of a particularly
educational program.
To ensure protections for students attending educational and
training programs in California, the Act provides that if an
institution offers an educational program in a profession,
occupation, trade, or career field that requires licensure in
California, the institution must have educational program
approval from the appropriate state licensing agency for any
SB 1059 (Monning) Page 12
of ?
student who completes that program to sit for any required
licensure exam. The law is intended to deal with the issue of
students completing an educational program specifically
designed to prepare them for certain occupations that in
reality may not meet any requirements for education required
for licensure.
In many instances, the BPPE approves institutions that may
also be subject to program approval by other regulatory
entities. The Board of Barbering and Cosmetology (BBC) for
example, approves curriculum, facilities, equipment and
textbooks for schools offering training programs for eventual
licensees, but schools must also be approved by BPPE, as BBC
has no statutory authority or experience to uphold student
protections like disclosures and fair business practices. The
California Massage Therapy Council (CAMTC), which provides for
voluntary certification of massage therapists in California,
now requires applicants to have completed education at a
school that is recognized by another state agency (most rely
on BPPE) and is also approved by the CAMTC. While some boards
and agencies are required to review the curriculum, and
sometimes even the actual institutions offering programs,
others require only BPPE approval in order to meet educational
requirements to sit for licensure, certification or
registration. The Bureau approves institutions that offer
degrees or programs intended to lead to licensure or
recognition where that regulatory agency has no formal role in
providing institutional or programmatic approval. For
example, the Board of Vocational Nursing and Psychiatric
Technicians (BVNPT) staff grants approval to vocational
nursing and psychiatric technician programs but does not have
oversight of institutions offering these programs in terms of
an ability to approve or disapprove a certain institution.
The Board of Behavioral Sciences (BBS) accepts graduates with
degrees from BPPE-approved institutions and programs to sit
for licensure in some of the BBS' licensing categories. BBS
does not require institutional accreditation by a USDE
approved accrediting agency, nor does BBS have approval for
the institutions and programs training its eventual licensees.
The Board of Psychology also accepts graduates with degrees
from BPPE-approved institutions to sit for licensure but has
no approval over the schools and does not rely on an
institutional accrediting agency to measure institutional
quality. The Board of Registered Nursing (BRN), on the other
SB 1059 (Monning) Page 13
of ?
hand, has complete authority to regulate nursing schools in
California, following years of extremely comprehensive
standards BRN required for nursing schools, like the
administration and organization of a program, faculty
qualifications, faculty responsibilities, curriculum, clinical
facilities and assurances of a procedure for resolving student
grievances. However, some schools may offer a nursing program
approved by BRN but that same school may also offer training
programs in other professions, for which BPPE approval of that
institution would still be required.
ABA accredited and State Bar accredited law schools are
specifically exempt from having to be approved by BPPE.
Students attending law schools in California are not subject
to any of the student protections under the Act and any
recourse provided by the Act and Bureau oversight.
2.Related Legislation This Year. SB 1281 (Block) requires law
schools that are not ABA approved to publicly disclose on its
website, with a link on its home page under "Admissions"
information the institution, including, among other items,
outcomes for graduates and bar passage data. Requires the
information to be complete, accurate and not misleading.
( Status: The bill is currently pending in the Senate
Committee on Judiciary.)
AB 1835 (Holden) exempts institutions that grant doctoral
degrees in psychoanalysis from the provisions of the Act
requiring unaccredited degree granting institutions to be
accredited if all of the institution's students hold master's
or doctoral degrees before enrollment in the institution and
the institution has obtained accreditation from, or has
submitted a self-study application to, the Accreditation
Council for Psychoanalytic Education on or before July 1,
2017. ( Status: The bill is currently pending in the Assembly
Committee on Higher Education.)
AB 1996 (Gordon) exempts a nonprofit institution that is
accredited by WASC, does not award degrees or diplomas, and is
paid from state or federal student financial aid programs for
fewer than 20 percent of its students who receive vocational
training from the Act. ( Status: The bill is currently
pending in the Assembly Committee on Higher Education.)
SB 1059 (Monning) Page 14
of ?
3.Prior Related Legislation. SB 1247 (Lieu, Chapter 840,
Statutes of 2014) prohibited an institution, beginning January
1, 2016, from claiming an exemption from the California
Private Postsecondary Education Act and Bureau oversight if
the institution is approved to participate in the Title 38
Program.
AB 2099 (Frazier, Chapter 676, Statutes of 2014) stipulated
new Title 38 veterans funding eligibility standards for
postsecondary institutions in California. All institutions now
must provide license examination passage rates to students,
and institutions that offer degrees must have institutional
and programmatic accreditation in order to receive Title 38
monies. The bill also provided that, in order for a
postsecondary institution to be determined eligible to accept
Title 38 monies, determined by CSAAVE, the postsecondary
institution, whether it offers degrees or not, must either be
a public school, a nonprofit school, approved by the Bureau or
be regionally accredited.
SB 1568 (Dunn, Chapter 534, Statutes of 2006) transferred
regulation and oversight of unaccredited law schools and
correspondence law schools from the BPPVE to the State Bar
CBE. The bill also required correspondence law schools to be
required to disclose their faculty-to-student ratio and their
Baby Bar and general bar exam passage rates to prospective
students in the same manner required of unaccredited schools.
4.Arguments in Support. The Association of California
Accredited Law Schools (CALS), comprised of the State Bar
accredited law schools, writes that this bill will cure the
injustice and apparent unintended consequences of AB 2099 and
notes that in order to become accredited, the schools must
establish that their paramount objective is to provide a sound
legal education. CALS notes that it certainly understands the
need to monitor schools our veterans attend to ensure the
education they are receiving is beneficial and cost effective
and states that accreditation by the State Bar provides that
assurance. According to CALS, its schools must maintain a
sound program of legal education and adhere to carefully drawn
rules that regulate all aspects of the institution. CALS
states that working men and women, many of whom are veterans,
are able to realize their aspirations because of these
SB 1059 (Monning) Page 15
of ?
programs located in areas unserved by other law schools and
that are affordable and offer day and night programs.
Cal Northern School of Law supports this bill and cites its
5-year cumulative bar passage rate of 82 percent, one of the
highest pass rates out of all the State Bar accredited
schools, noting that through its graduates' success, the
school has demonstrated that a small school with dedicated
faculty and motivated students can provide a quality legal
education at a fraction of the cost of larger law programs and
provide a benefit to the surrounding communities the school
serves. Cal Northern School of Law believes that by not
correcting the requirements in AB 2099, veterans are subject
to harm by preventing them from using benefits to receive a
quality legal education at a reasonable cost.
According to Lincoln Law School of Sacramento , AB 2099 prevents
veterans wishing to use their Title 38 benefits from attending
the school and that since 2005, 30 students receiving Title 38
benefits have been enrolled, with seven of the nine who have
graduated also passing the Bar, for a 77.7 percent passage
rate. Lincoln Law School adds that its graduates have
excelled in the legal field and that veterans attending the
school are able to use their benefits there to further
education and become successful members of the Bar.
The Monterey Business Council supports this bill and states that
it is crucial California veterans and their dependents
continue to be eligible to use GI Bill education benefits to
attend law schools accredited by the State Bar. The Monterey
Business Council states that without SB 1059, for the first
time in four decades, California veterans who live and work
along the Central Coast wishing to pursue a graduate education
in law will be forced to quit their jobs, move their families,
and relocate out of the region in order to utilize the
educational benefits they have earned.
5.Suggested Enhancements and Efforts. Law schools have come
under scrutiny throughout the nation for high costs resulting
in large amounts of student debt and low Bar passage rates. A
2015 Los Angeles Times investigation found that nearly
9 out of 10 students attending unaccredited law schools drop out
and that many are unable to pass the Baby Bar, let alone
complete the program to sit for the Bar examination. These
SB 1059 (Monning) Page 16
of ?
schools are not subject to Bar passage requirements, nor are
required to meet program quality, student disclosure or
student protection standards but have been eligible to enroll
students utilizing Title 38 benefits.
While the State Bar accreditation process may align with other
standards used for verification of law school program quality
and integrity, such as those by the ABA, the issue of student
protections at law schools remains, as well as the ability of
the State Bar to provide quality oversight of schools. The
Author may wish to outline further criteria demonstrating
program quality to define law schools eligible for continued
participation in the Title 38 Program and may wish to include
a sunset date on these schools' continued eligibility in order
to allow the Legislature to further review the performance and
level of quality oversight of these institutions receiving
veterans financial aid benefits.
The Committee may also wish to further evaluate the role for
appropriate oversight of law schools that are not accredited
by ABA or the State Bar, including whether students attending
unaccredited law schools are deserving of protections and
prevention from unlawful business practices within the Act.
NOTE : Double-referral to Senate Committee on Rules, second.
SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION:
Support:
Association of California Accredited Law Schools
Cal Northern School of Law
City of Seaside Mayor Ralph Rubio
Leon Panetta, Panetta Institute for Public Policy
Lincoln Law School of Sacramento
Monterey Business Council
Santa Cruz County Supervisor Ryan Coonerty
Trinity Law School
Numerous individuals
Opposition: None on file as of March 30, 2016.
SB 1059 (Monning) Page 17
of ?
-- END --