Guest Commentary: The Three Scariest Things About Amendment 66

October 30, 2013
By
TRICK OR TREAT? You’re not a heartless monster who hates kids if you oppose this massive tax increase.

TRICK OR TREAT? You’re not a heartless monster who hates kids if you oppose this massive tax increase (Li Tsin Soon Image)

Teachers’ unions, both national and local, are flooding the TV airwaves and spending piles of union bucks  – five million so far– to convince Colorado parents to pass a nearly one billion dollar tax increase “for the children.”  The irony is that most of the ad money they’re spending is taxpayer money – we pay our teachers’ salaries, and they pay union dues that buy TV and radio ads to convince us to give them more money. 

And they know that every time they flail us with that good old “it’s for the kids” guilt trip it’s nearly impossible to resist without being branded heartless monsters. But are we heartless monsters or are we just smart parents who want real reform instead of gold-plated band aids?

Because the brutal truth is that absolutely nothing in this hefty tax increase guarantees the money will be devoted to improving our kids’ education. There is not one word in this ballot issue that promises more gym classes, more music classes, more teacher aids, or anything else the pro-66 ads claim. There’s no guarantee that math or reading or science proficiency will improve, that graduation rates will rise, nothing that addresses academic excellence – in short – that our kids’ education will get better. Actually, many scholarly studies have shown that changes like school discipline, a rigorous curriculum, and parental involvement affect kids’ academic success more than school spending.

What a shocker. So here, for your pre-Halloween terror fix, are the top three reasons that you’re not a heartless monster who hates kids when you vote against this massive tax increase.

  1. The Money Helps Some Kids but Not Others

Most new tax money will fund more preschool and full day kindergarten for youngsters, plus additional money for English second language (ESL) learners and “at-risk” students.

The measure also funds Senate Bill 213 which sets aside over seven million dollars for principal and teacher “professional development,” for instance “team-building exercises” for teachers like rope climbing, obstacle courses, and tug of war.  And spending that 7 million certainly will involve funding more teacher training days, when our kids get to stay home and watch TV instead of getting educated.

But won’t money stay in your local schools to fund academic excellence?  Not so much. The amendment’s sponsor, Rep. Millie Hamner, told the House Education Committee last April that the share of dollars under principal control will be only “three to four percent of district funds.” But even those scanty funds will not be equally allocated among all school districts; more money will go to districts with more students who qualify for free or reduced-price lunch.

This means that, for example, for every new tax dollar under this amendment that Boulder County citizens pay, their schools only get 59 cents to spend.  For every new tax dollar paid by Jefferson County residents, their schools get 56 cents. And for every new dollar Douglas County residents are taxed, their kids’ schools receive only 50 cents. Of the 64 counties in Colorado, these three –Boulder, Jefferson, Douglas — will pay nearly 33 percent of the new taxes but receive just 18 percent of the new funds back.  Denver citizens, however, will get nearly 100% back of every dollar they pay in new taxes.  (This research is from Ben DeGrow, Senior Education Policy Analyst at the Independence Institute, used the new formula in the amendment plus county taxpayer info from the Colorado Dept. of Revenue to arrive at these figures.)

Something else to think about: this amendment does nothing to limit hiring more administrators, and Colorado schools are already top-heavy with officialdom. According to the Colorado Department of Education, from 2000-1 to 2012-13 the number of administrators rose 51 percent, yet in the same timeframe the student population only increased 19 percent and the number of teachers, just 16.5 percent. This trend has continued for decades. The Friedman Center for Educational Choice Study showed that from 1992 to 2009, administrators increased 83 percent while the number of students only increased by 38 percent. Without this explosion in the public school bureaucracy the study says teachers could be earning $10,000 more per year. Today the fat-paycheck bureaucrats continue to keep teachers’ salaries down.

  1.  Big Price Tag, Little Change

This amendment will wallop a family’s budget big-time, raising Coloradans’ income tax anywhere from 8 to 27 percent, depending on earnings. According to the Census American Community Survey, the median Colorado family income was $69,110 in 2011 (latest figure available).  So this new tax will cost this median Colorado family over $255 per year (for a total tax bill of $3,455.50), not the $133 that the slick pro-tax ads cite.  This is real money to families already struggling while Colorado’s economy attempts to recover.

Importantly, this amendment also permanently changes Colorado’s income tax structure from a flat tax of 4.63 percent to a redistribution-of-wealth scheme, a graduated tax ranging from 5 percent for the first $75,000 of income to 5.9 percent for every dollar above $75,000. The new tax will handicap our state’s economic recovery because businesses will have less money to hire, which is why 96 percent of the members of the National Federation of Independent Businesses voted against supporting the tax.

This is how it looks in real dollars for taxpayers, and for the 92 percent of Colorado businesses whose owners file as individuals.

chart

  1. This Tax is Forever and Will Go Up Every Year

Enshrining this nearly one billion dollar tax as an amendment to the Colorado Constitution assures it will ratchet our income tax upward, in perpetuity. The measure robs taxpayers of our right to vote on future increases of this tax with a built-in provision that exempts it from TABOR, the Taxpayer Bill of Rights. At the same time it allows the legislature to increase the tax on our incomes by the rate of inflation every year. So we can expect our taxes to rise every single year from now on – without our approval. Maybe our taxes will go up 2 or 3 percent with inflation, or maybe 7 or 10 percent; there’s no way to know. Plus it forever locks in school spending at 43 percent of the state’s budget, handcuffing the legislature’s ability to spend on fire or flood or highways. How scary is that?

Joy Overbeck is a Colorado journalist and author who’s written for The Washington Times, The Daily Caller, American Thinker, My Colorado View, Breakpoint, and elsewhere. Her column originally appeared here.

Comments made by visitors are not representative of The Colorado Observer staff.

2 Responses to Guest Commentary: The Three Scariest Things About Amendment 66

  1. Laurie Duke
    October 30, 2013 at 11:11 am

    This is a great article. The fact that so much money is going into supporting Amendment 66 should send up a red flag to everyone, especially since it is backed by teacher’s unions and $1,000,000 each from Bloomburg and Gates. We are losing local control of our schools and our kids will suffer from as a result. The tax burden to small businesses and incomes over $75,000 is unfair, too. I know we need to collect taxes, but increasing the tax rate on those that are providing jobs for our economy is a bad idea!

  2. Anna
    October 30, 2013 at 6:47 pm

    As a kindergarten teacher, I agree with the overall post (although I do not know the circumstances behind the request for more funding; I’m from CO but currently live and teach in Kansas City) but I heartily disagree with the first point. Explanation:

    “Most new tax money will fund more preschool and full day kindergarten for youngsters, plus additional money for English second language (ESL) learners and “at-risk” students.”
    –this statement is directly under the heading about how the money won’t help all kids. While the money may not directly affect 100% of students, it will help far more than this statement implies. How? Because when more kids go to preschool/full-day kindergarten (as opposed to sitting at home learning nothing–yes some parents work with their kids on letters, numbers, etc and that is FANTASTIC, however too many parents don’t work with their kids at all), fewer kids need extra attention in K/1st grade. Those kids who didn’t learn what they needed to learn in preschool (or kindergarten) come into kindergarten (or 1st grade) not even knowing the letters in their name, in contrast to the rest of the class who knows at least half the alphabet and most of their numbers 1-20 and have an understanding of counting and letter sounds. The teacher’s job is to get ALL the kids reading and understanding math at the same high level by May–so much of his/her time is spent working extra hard with the lower students in order to get them caught up, rather than being able to spend an equal amount of time with every student. The situation with ESL and at-risk kiddos is similar–the more help they get from an extra program, or the smaller class sizes that are made possible, the more help other kids in class with them will get for themselves.

    “The measure also funds Senate Bill 213 which sets aside over seven million dollars for principal and teacher “professional development,” for instance “team-building exercises” for teachers like rope climbing, obstacle courses, and tug of war. And spending that 7 million certainly will involve funding more teacher training days, when our kids get to stay home and watch TV instead of getting educated.”
    –Those training days are essential for your child to get a good education. Curriculum, systems, and methods are constantly changing, and while teachers work plenty of hours off the clock (evenings/weekends/summers), those training days are the only time when the whole district (or school, etc) can get together and learn the same thing together. I have attended trainings that teach me better methods for helping my students become great writers, proper protocol for testing them in reading, appropriate procedures and guidelines for working with my kids who need that extra help and consequently require data collection on often-confusing systems, etc. Sure there are meetings here and there that regurgitate what I’ve already heard–the same is true of any profession with meetings–but even when I’ve heard it before, there are other teachers there who haven’t, and I may recognize the material but it’s often so comprehensive (a full-day seminar) that I definitely don’t remember every word so it’s good to hear again. Teachers take this training and bring it right back into the classroom to help their students.

    As far as the team-building exercises, I don’t know where this author got the information about what types of team building exercises will be paid for and how much will be paid for them–I wouldn’t advocate for very much money being spent on them, yet for staff at a brand new school or for teams who have very different personalities, team-building exercises are very helpful. The better the teachers on a grade-level (or subject area) team get along with each other, the more they collaborate, and the more resources they will be using with their students.

    Again…I’m not disagreeing with the article overall as I don’t know the full story behind why some people feel this money is necessary or not, but I did want to do what I could to correct some of the statements made as part of the argument. I mean no disrespect to the author–it’s just one of those things you have to be a teacher to realize. :)

Comments

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The Complete Colorado
Colorado Peak Politics - Sometimes Unruly. Always Conservative.

Visitor Poll

Should illegal immigrant kids flooding the border be housed in Colorado?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

The Colorado Observer