California Lutheran University's Student Newspaper Since 1961

The Echo

California Lutheran University's Student Newspaper Since 1961

The Echo

California Lutheran University's Student Newspaper Since 1961

The Echo

    Money raised from Prop 30 is not guaranteed to benefit education

    With the election over, one hot issue that came to my attention was Prop 30, a temporary increase in sales and income tax to primarily benefit education. outlines the proposition’s main points, which include the increase in taxes for the top three percent of earners in California. It also includes a 3.45 percent increase on California sales tax from 7.25 percent to 7.5 percent.

    Naturally, both democrats and Republicans had strong feelings about the issue.

    According to vice president of the CLU Democratic Club, Kiera Murphy, this was one of the main issues that democrats were campaigning for.

    “If Prop 30 does not get passed, 15 days of pay are going to be cut from the fiscal school year,” Murphy said in an email. “We cannot afford to cut education.”

    These cuts equate to $6 billion this year.

    Although Prop 30 will not affect us at CLU, or any student at a state or private university, we should be aware of the impact it could have on California K-12 schools as well as community colleges.

    “You have to create a way for young people to get an education quickly and affordably,” said Murphy. “That also prepares students to get a skill set that leads toward sustainable and well-paying jobs.”

    While democrats seem to love to raise the taxes for other people, Republicans don’t.

    The main argument against Prop 30 was that there is no guarantee that the money raised will benefit the school system. This argument was enough to influence my opinion.

    “Prop 30 is a decent idea in the thought,” said Bradley Stoner, vice president of the CLU Republican Club. “But the extra taxes have no designated place to be spent, so citizens may never know where the money is going. It may be going right into the politician’s pocket. A no on Prop 30 is the best choice for California.”

    The Bakersfield Californian believes, “As desperate as the state is for money, we oppose Prop. 30 because it promotes the same bad budgeting policies that pushed the state into the mess it’s in today.”

    I think that it is important to understand that this change is temporary. The raise in taxes will last for seven years. However, I expect that it will just continue to increase. Although it is temporary, we still do not know exactly where the money is going.

    People in education are feeling the stress of Prop 30 as well. The potential cuts would make it even more difficult to find jobs.

    For Mt. Clef Graduate Resident Director Lauren Anderson, Prop 30 not passing could mean a difficult job hunt for students post-CLU.

    “For me that means finding a counseling job will be harder than it already is,” said Anderson. “It is already stressful enough.”

    Although Prop 30 sounds like it would be beneficial and a good plan, raising taxes for something that is not definite does not sound like a good idea to me.


    Miles George
    Staff Writer
    Published Nov. 7, 2012

    Leave a Comment

    Comments (0)

    All The Echo Picks Reader Picks Sort: Newest

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