Proposition 103

Proposition 103, in case you hadn’t heard, is a ballot measure that will go to vote in November this year for consideration by the Colorado taxpayers. Democratic state Senator Rollie Heath, unsurprisingly, was the sponsor of the initiative due to the $500 million cut over the last three years. The bill is, in the simplest terms possible, an increase in income tax across the board with “5 percent from 4.63 percent and the sales and use levy to 3 percent from 2.9 percent for five years.” This is apparently all due to the fact that Colorado is in the bottom twenty states in terms of how much money is actually spent on education.

Note, I said spent, not education results.

In terms of education results, according to the National Center for Education Statistics, Colorado placed above the national average in every subject from 4-8 grades from 2009, including math. In fact, Colorado is better than or equal to all but five states in the US in fourth grade math, and better than or equal to all but eight by the eighth grade.

In reading, Colorado does even better-Only four states beat it’s scores at 4th grade, and only seventeen are it’s equals. By eighth grade, again, only seven states can claim better education rankings and only nineteen can match it.

Even in Science and Writing, Colorado finds itself in the middle to higher rankings of the country, where until 2009 it was only average at best in mathematics, and a look at those same statistics see that the scores have been rising since 2005.

The website was unable to display such rankings for Grade 12, but SAT score rankings in a chart by amount spent on pupils from K-12 can suffice for a rough estimate. According to the chart, Colorado was number 15 in the country in rankings of highest overall SAT scores, with it’s strongest showings in mathematics.

While education can always be improved, the fact these scores are so high clearly indicates that it’s not necessarily a lack of funding that determines results.

At this point, in the wake of the Wisconsin union debacle and the Atlanta school district grade fixing scandals, to think that what the current crop of educators need is more money is more than a little suspect. Being proposed by Democrats, who are heavily supported by unions and teacher’s unions in particular, makes it more suspect. And the idea that it would add an extra $3 billion dollars into the educational budget based on minor tax raises across the board in an already struggling economy is... Well... Extremely thin.

While these seem to be minor tax raises, it would in fact result in the largest tax increase in the history of the state of Colorado, going to a general fund that the politicians could spend however they like. Yes, that sounds like it would be used in an absolutely trustworthy manner doesn't it?

As the great French economist Frederic Bastriat commented: “In the department of economy, an act, a habit, an institution, a law, gives birth not only to an effect, but to a series of effects. Of these effects, the first only is immediate; it manifests itself simultaneously with its cause - it is seen. The others unfold in succession- they are not seen.” In effect, it is an political economic version of Newton’s law that every action has a reaction. As we see in the massive uncertainty generated by the actions of a blundering government in Washington, even well intended legislation can have unforeseen, even disastrous effects.

“But Thomas,” you say, “it’s just an extra .37 percent income tax.” Yes it is, but given the growing performance of students at virtually every level of education with less spending, I fail to see the necessity of increasing it when state spending in general has led to massive deficits that burden the economy from the nation to the state level. It’s addressing a non-existent problem: “We’re not spending enough on our schooling despite the fact the results are improving!”

It’s as if someone were to complain: “That Jane Austin novel was great, but do you know what it was missing? Hover boards!” Though to be fair, that may not be the best analogy. I for one would love to see Mr. Darcy fighting apes with jet packs on a hoverboard with a moon laser.

Just me? Okay...

Ideally, legislation should be drafted to deal with a real problem. In reality, it is often an act with the interests of many parties involved with the problem it is addressing to a varying degree. If it has the interest of many parties rather than a singular few, then it is more likely to be focused on the exact problem. With fewer interests involved, it is less likely to be focused on a problem.

This is clearly an amendment with the interest of Democratic politicians in mind before anything else. The $3 billion in raised tax revenues is also extremely dubious, and if there is a revenue increase it will invariably go to teacher’s unions and back into Democratic political campaigns before whatever’s left trickles down to the schools, generally for administrators rather than teachers.

It’s the same old game that’s been repeated numerous times since the 1950s, and I strongly urge you, the reader, to vote no on it. There are better ways of improving education than giving the Democrats and unions more money.