Tax Initiatives: Proposition 30

At every debate and town hall event Senator Sanders has reiterated his plan for tuition-free college, and has usually been met with the same question: "How are you going to pay for it." For the sake of debate lets say Mr. Sanders is able to pay for it. Even though top economists, including democratic ones, say his math doesn't add up (you can find my cited sources at the end of the article), lets pretend that it somehow will. Let us pretend that Bernie Sanders will actually make public college tuition-free across the United States, effective immediately. Now it is time to play devils advocate, (or realist) and break down the reasons why tuition-free college would be a bad thing, not only for the economy, but every person currently pursuing a degree.

Tuition is put in place for a reason. It shouldn’t be lifted because if it is the government will end up having to come out of more money to fund the things that more of the college students need as such as books, computer labs etc. By the government needing more funding that would mean the taxpayers taxes would have to increase without their say so it wouldn’t even be an option.

Since 1974, tuition has been on the rise and has reached new heights. One reason why tuition is increasing is because of “the state governments’ unwillingness or inability to raise per-student financing” (Davidson). The government is spending less on college and moving those funds into other categories, such as the military. Furthermore, colleges are spending less on each student than they did during pre-recession (Fox). Even after the recession, the government is continuously cutting more and more from education funds. As the government cuts more from education funds, tuition cost will steadily increase to compensate the loss. Tuition increased from 1994 to 2015 is depicted in the graph on the next page. Drawing a conclusion from the graph, it is possible that if this trend continues, public colleges will approximately reach the same price as private colleges one day. The amount of financial aid given is unable to meet the needs of lower income students,

As much as Proposition 13 has received criticism, it still has its advantages. The proposition has increased stability in the community and allowed predictability for property owners. Progressive income tax has an impact on higher incomes, whereas property tax affects those in the lower income bracket. Therefore, high property taxes affect those that have highly valued property, but earn low incomes. Reducing property taxes for such people is a great advantage to them. Furthermore, the proposition has enabled Californian taxpayers to save billions of dollars over the years (Smith, 1998).

I would have rather paid a measly 200.00 to the government than to have Proposition 13. This is a slap in the face as a teacher, they are truly hurting the wrong things. Most people knew that it would do this and it did. I was resentful and how many ways can we express ourselves? I thought this was like throwing the baby out with the bathwater. What was even worse was that it undercut and there had to be reductions to meet constraints and we had to go backwards. Also the two-thirds vote should have been majority. Another impact was that other states followed California and the taxpayers wanted to send a message, I believe Oregon passed one. There is only one way to get around this proposition and that is mellow rues."

First of all, the money issue is the big problem to the government. Taxpayers are one of the treasury account for government to withdraw the money and provided the fund to school. I know that all the taxpayers will burden out the amount of money they have to deducted on their check. They obviously not agree with what the government doing, so they have to rejected free community college tuition opinion. But if they take a step back and think about their children, whose go to school and need to pay the tuition for the school. So the tuition fee will still a burden to all the parents

If the current system not the administration calculates that the annually will increase as a chance to reinforce the district where it needs the assistance. While increased funding not necessarily equate to improvements in student performance, it’s funding and where it is clearly needs to be addressed. Ambitious effort to lift student achievement and, fundamentally, to undermine the idea of public

Aside from school funding and protecting Children’s Healthcare, Proposition 55 will also maintain low taxes for families whose income is low. Proposition 55 will only keep higher taxes on the rich because as many say, they are able to afford it. According to Protecting California, these high taxes will only “apply to singles that make $250,00 and couples who make $500,000 or more a year.” (Protecting California) This shows that it really does only tax higher to those who really are able to afford it. Voter’s Guide is also stating how it will, “Only affect the wealthiest Californians who can most afford it, ensuring they continue to pay their share of taxes.” (Voters Guide) Ergo meaning that, the high taxes being taxed will indeed be paid because

In an article written by Michelle Goldberg who writes for The Nation (2015), includes the Governor of the State of Kansas in the article “This is What Happens When You Slash Funding for Public Universities.” (Goldberg, 2015). The moral issue is that the poor keep getting poorer, and struggle to qualify for funding for tuition, which would put them in a better position to increase their pay. According to an article in The Kansas City Star (2015), Kansas is not the only state affected by the increase in tuition. Community colleges have reduced the number of classes they offer (Hanna, 2015) and some states have opted to reach out to the upper crust by offering elite apartments to draw the students who have money to pay for college

Proposition 58 was originally implemented to remedy the looming budget crisis by requiring the state to pass balanced budgets and reduce debt. The legislation in Proposition 58 created the Budget Stabilization Account (BSA), and required the Governor to decide whether 3 percent of the general funds would be deposited into the BSA, until the maximum target is reached. Proposition 2 would amend the California constitution, changing the procedures in which the state of California pays off debt and saves money. The initiative requires a minimum of 1.5% ($800 million currently) of the budget toward paying off state debt and savings, whereas currently there is no required minimum. In addition, the Governor currently is allowed to put less than the base amount in the BSA, but under Proposition 2, the governor would have to declare a fiscal emergency with the approval of the legislature before withholding funds or withdrawing from the account. The initiative also creates reserves for schools and colleges that would reap significant benefits when the economy is thriving. Proponents of the bill predict it will prevent unforeseen taxes due to fiscal emergencies, reduce the state deficit, and provide extra funding for schools. Opponents of the proposition, such as Educate Our State, claim the amends to the Californian constitution will cause hardship for local schools

It will continue increasing taxes on the wealthiest Californians and fund schools and health care. The education advocates gathered together to make sure proposition 55 would be pass, so that schools don't lose the funding they get. The organizations supporting proposition 55 in, John Fensterwald Prop. 55: Initiative to extend income tax increases to benefit schools are California Teachers Association, California Association of Hospitals and Health Systems and California State Council of State Employees. California propositions: A voter guide, Laurel Rosenhall article mentions the organizations that oppose proposition 55 which are Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, Gov. Jerry Brown and California Taxpayers Action Network. Supporters say that proposition 55 will prevent $4 billion in cuts to California's public schools, help children access health care by continuing taxing only the wealthiest Californians which will be followed by strict accountability requirements. While in TAX EXTENSION TO FUND EDUCATION AND HEALTHCARE. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT, the opposing side argues that voters supported higher taxes in 2012 because Governor Brown said they would be temporary. State budget estimates show higher taxes are not needed to balance the budget, but the special interests want to extend them to grow government bigger. Proposition 55 should be passed because it will only affect the wealthiest

The few people who stated their supportive thoughts on this matter were encouraging about wanting free tuition for community colleges. "I think any time access to education is increased, it is a positive step forward in economic vitality, Stanley said.” (Obama 's free community college tuition plan raises doubts). I agree with what Stanley stated when we take the initiative to realize there is a problem in our education system with furthering our education it’s a good leap forward to more people getting the right education needed to get better jobs and provide for their families. Even David Patti who is president and CEO of Pennsylvania business council also suggested cost of tuition wouldn’t need to be very high in cost if companies donated equipment and computers necessary to the schools. Laura Fisher who is senior vice president with Allegheny business council stated a good example such as there are

Okay, education time for all you prop 55 supporters. A temporary tax is that TEMPorary. Prop 30 that passed in 2012 was to take care of the lost revenue only during the period of recession. If Mr. Brown and the unions support prop 55 we should read between the lines. Look at SB1530 as an example of why we should fear what the unions support. In SB1530 the unions protected teachers involved in serious or egregious unprofessional conduct from dismissal. Currently, the appeals processes and dismissal of permanent employees is wasteful. The unions do not put the students ' safety as the priority.

But then again funds on schools are not the same from state to state. This can be explained by the different educational input costs like real estate and teachers salaries. But that’s a whole other story. Funding for schools is not the issue obviously it just needs more of a balancing. The balancing can help out drastically because there will not be a huge gap in the financing of schools. In other words, many Americans will not have to worry about their child attending a school with overcrowded classrooms.

As a result of this, states receive pressure to make up for this and must raise tuition. Grant donors are also becoming less generous in their contributions to students as well. This makes affording college even harder for students.