Click here to read Part I and click here to read Part II of this series.

In this, the third installment about lawmakers in California cutting $1.7 billion total from the university and community college systems, we will examine yet another way in which universities unnecessarily burn through taxpayer dollars. In Part II, we demonstrated that illegal immigration costs the taxpayers at least $9 billion, including $3.2 billion for K-12 education and $200 million per year in subsidies for in-state tuition to higher education facilities. So, in what other ways are universities wasting taxpayer money?

'I'm really worried about how I'm going to pay for rent, transportation and food,' said Sweeney, a liberal arts major. ‘It's definitely stressful, especially with the economy the way it is. So many people I know can't even get jobs with a B.A. What kind of job am I going to get to pay off all these loans?'

Dior Sweeney is a UC Berkeley senior, and like many students close to graduation, she is worried about being able to find a job, wondering how she will support herself and pay back her $20,000 in student loans. A segment on NPR last year highlighted other liberal arts students who couldn't find jobs. They called in, one after the other, to complain about the lack of jobs available to them, they felt, as liberal arts majors.

This chart from the Bureau of Labor Statistics about the fastest growing occupations highlights how tough it may be for liberal arts majors to find jobs after graduation, especially in the European-style social democracy experiment that American politicians seem intent on forcing us to experience. There is a very real problem with many of these students becoming a part of what some are calling "a lost generation."

There is a very good argument to be made, particularly during these tough economic times, that certain classes, majors, or entire departments are more expendable than others. It makes sense to cut back on the resources allocated toward efforts that are not preparing young people for the modern economy. At first look, it appears obvious that universities should first cut classes and programs that do not offer bright futures for students, such as liberal arts classes. Math and science have been forced into the backseat at many universities to make way for liberal arts classes at the same time that math and science are becoming the foundation for many 21^st century careers.

Most universities only require liberal arts majors to take one or two low-level math courses, and maybe two or three science courses to graduate. Frequently these classes have titles like, "College Algebra for the Liberal Arts Major," or "Geology for the Liberal Arts Major," and so on, as if "the Liberal Arts Major" couldn't possibly sit through a normal college algebra class. No, perish the thought! On the other hand, math and science majors must take at least a couple dozen liberal arts classes, where there are no classes such as, "Sociology for the Math and Science Major."

By allowing liberal arts majors off the hook regarding math and science, the universities are ill equipping these students for the modern world economy, and it is not surprising to see liberal arts majors floundering in the job market. So, should universities bring math and science to the forefront of the higher education experience? Absolutely. There is no excuse for letting liberal arts majors believe they do not need to possess a solid grasp of math and science. That is the first step that universities can take in these tough economic times.

However, simply cutting liberal arts classes won't solve all of the problems. Universities must also reevaluate what the liberal arts means, and how they can best prepare their students for the real world. Victor Davis Hanson, a world-renowned classicist and advocate of the humanities and liberal arts in general, makes an excellent point about why liberal arts programs are failing students and society, and why the costs are currently outweighing the benefits.

With three decades of defining the study of literature and history as a melodrama of race, class, and gender oppression, it managed to turn off college students and the general reading public. 

And Hanson's view about what the liberal arts should be:

But the liberal arts train students to write, think, and argue inductively, while drawing upon evidence from a shared body of knowledge. Without that foundation, it is harder to make - or demand from others - logical, informed decisions about managing our supercharged society as it speeds on by.

Citizens - shocked and awed by technological change - become overwhelmed by the Internet chatter, cable news, talk radio, video games, and popular culture of the moment. Without links to our heritage, we in ignorance begin to think that our own modern challenges - the war in Afghanistan, gay marriage, cloning, or massive deficits - are unique and not comparable to those solved in the past.

And without citizens broadly informed by the humanities, we descend into a pyramidal society. A tiny technocratic elite on top crafts everything from cell phones and search engines to foreign policy and economic strategy. A growing mass below has neither understanding of the present complexity nor the basic skills to question what they are told.

Hanson hits the nail on the head. Liberal arts departments have become nothing more than bunkers where narrow-minded, special interests hunker down to indoctrinate generation after generation of American college students. No longer do our liberal arts courses teach students to, as Hanson writes, "write, think, and argue inductively, while drawing upon evidence from a shared body of knowledge." Rather, they train students to regurgitate politically correct,  trendy ideas, thoughts, and verbiage, destroying any vestige of critical analysis or inductive reasoning.

If liberal arts programs continue to create cookie cutter, left-wing activists, then the time has come to cut these departments in their entirety, allowing other parts of the universities to remain unscathed. Taxpayers cannot afford to pay for the indoctrination of their future leaders, especially when that indoctrination leaves students with nothing to offer society except empty, politically correct jargon. However, if the people running the universities (ahem, Mark Yudof) are brave enough to face down this perversion of the liberal arts, and commit themselves to revamping these departments and courses so that they actually become, well, liberal again, then they only need cut the frivolous, pseudo-liberal arts programs. This would serve to implement the necessary budget cuts while leaving in place the classes that actually educate, rather than indoctrinate.

With reality crashing down around the previously encapsulated ivory towers, it is time for higher education providers to weigh the costs and the benefits of each class, program, and department. Right now, the liberal arts aren't looking too good, and as Victor Davis Hanson argues, that may not portend well for any of us.

Stay tuned for Part IV of the series.