An analysis of the impact of state government regulation on higher education in California is presented. Two assumptions are explained on which the analysis is based; i.e., that the mission of higher education is teaching, scholarship, and service to the community and that public higher education is rightfully under the authority of the governor and legislature of the state. Possible objections to the second assumption are discussed and a third assumption is addressed--that there has been a sharp increase in the volume and techniques of state regulation in recent years. Ten techniques for regulating higher education, such as regulation of the structure and power of the governing boards, are listed. It is stressed that this trend is likely to continue and limitations in the regulatory techniques make it difficult for an elected official to effectively exercise responsibility for higher education. The consequences of regulation are examined and it is suggested that the thrust of the controversy over regulation should focus not on the authority of government to regulate, but on the manner in which the authority is exercised. Arguments for the delegation of authority are considered and means of that delegation to public higher education, while still remaining effectively accountable, are explored. (PHR)