It is obvious that California is facing a budget crisis. The
last few years this state has faced an extreme amount of funding cuts and has
still found itself in billions of dollars of debt. One area that is especially experiencing
this financial disparity is the educational system of California. This once
great system has faced billions of dollars in budget cuts in that last few
years and is facing $5.35 billion more in cuts this next year if we don’t act
now. Governor Jerry Brown’s solution: Proposition 30. Proposition 30 promises
to give back about $6 billion to K-12 and community colleges through a quarter-cent
sales tax raise for four years and a 1-3% income tax raise for seven years to
singles making at least $250,000 or couples making at least $500,000 annually. The
money acquired from taxation will go into an Education Protection Account (EPA)
and will be given to the schools to use where needed allocating 89% to K-12 and
11% to community colleges. Not only will this improve funding for schools, but
it will also prevent a series of “trigger cuts” that will occur if Proposition
30 does not pass that not only effect the school systems, but public safety as
well. As a student currently attending one of California’s many community
colleges, I know first-hand how the budget cuts are affecting the educational
system and I strongly urge a YES vote on Proposition 30 to prevent more damage
to the schools.
Like
all complex changes to a Constitution, there are both pros and cons to the
change. History has shown that Californians do not favor implementing new tax
raises. In the last decade voters have turned down 10 out of 11 propositions
that involved raising taxes. Taxes can be annoying and even scary, especially
when it comes to trusting a government that hasn’t been exactly trustworthy and
honest with their taxpayer’s money and how they’ve been spending it. When
considering a lower class family, even the slightest raise in taxes could affect
them greatly. As explained in an article written by Bill Freeman: “[y]es, the
measure calls for a temporary one-quarter of one percent increase for four
years, but even with the increase, our sales taxes will be lower than they were
last year.” One would even say that this sales tax could affect small
businesses because people would be purchasing fewer products due to the raised
sales tax, but according to this quote, that argument does not stand.
Another
argument could be based upon the income tax raise of the wealthy. Why should
the rich pay for other people’s children to attend school? Ever since Reagan
was in office, America has seen an enormous decrease in income tax, especially
on the wealthy. Since the 1980’s, American has experienced a deficit where the
very important form of funding used to exist. The top 1%, which is who this
proposition will be taxing, supplies a large portion of funding in America.
America, and specifically California, cannot afford to tax the top 1% at this
low of a rate. Not only this, but the bottom 99% will benefit greatly from
their generosity.
Critics
argue that Proposition 30 is not enough. California needs a reform in the
education system and government in general. They may be right about this, but
now is not the time. The state needs a quick solution now and a reform would be
too much, too soon. Prop 30 is a temporary tax, so it gives the government time
to think and strategically plan how to fix this issue permanently. Otherwise,
we have 3 short months until the “trigger cuts” could be put in place and that
is not enough time for a reform. Because this taxation is temporary, the state
could become dependent on the money coming in, and once it stops California
would be in worse shape than before. In this case, we as voting citizens have
to make sure that a more permanent reform occurs before the money runs out.
Proposition
30, also known as “Schools and Local Public Safety Protection Act”, strongly
affects local governments in regards to public safety. Voters question why
schools and public safety issues are lumped together in one bill. The proposed “trigger
cuts” that would go through on January 1st of next year not only
remove funding from K-12 and community colleges. These cuts would pertain to UC’s,
CSU’s, social services such as police and fire, prisons, health programs, and many
departments such as Fish & Game and Parks & Recreation. Why does public
safety have anything to do with the school system? If Proposition 30 passes, it
will free up about $3 billion to go to these different public safety
departments that the state government dumped on local governments in 2011
without aid in funding. When concerning prisons, the measure will be supporting
programs in the prisons that educate prisoners and build their skills for
successful transition into society once they have been released. These programs
aim to lower the rate of returning convicts. This is a form of education, and
although a voter may not wish to support prisons, prisoners should not be
discriminated upon by being refused an opportunity like education. Also, with
less returning prisoners, this will shrink the population of the prisons in
California, which has been an ongoing issue and financial burden.
In
regards to Proposition 38, the measure running against Prop 30 that also claims
to produce funding for schools, voters should give a NO vote. Prop 38 claims to
raise about $10 billion in support for K-12 schools through extensive income taxes
to those making as low as $7,316 a year for 12 years. Prop 38 will only help
K-12 and will completely ignore higher education. Not only this, but if this
proposition goes through, the trigger cuts will still take place removing $6
billion from all of the school systems as well as public safety. Only one of
the propositions can pass. California’s education system needs change, and
needs it now. Although Proposition 30 may not be perfect, it is our best option
(and only option for higher education) until a better and permanent reform can
occur.
No comments:
Post a Comment