In his recent My Turn piece on school funding, Andru Volinsky makes two arguments. One, that each child should have access to state-funded services and goods needed to achieve productive citizenship. Two, that taxes for education should be designed in such a way that equal tax effort produces equal revenue. These arguments are not new. Over 40 years ago, the plaintiffs in the Jesseman case made the same claim that the education of our children depends on state funding educational goods and services with money raised from an equitable tax system.
Why hasn’t the tax system been reformed so that children are able to learn and taxes are equitable? The reason is clear. As Senator Long quipped, tax reform is, “Don’t tax you. Don’t tax me. Tax the fellow behind the tree.” With over 400 members, the New Hampshire Legislature knows that there is no fellow behind the tree. It also knows that the “equitable” tax system described by Andru Volinsky, one in which equal tax effort produces equal revenue, does not exist. And finally it knows that paying for educational goods and services with local money is conducive to learning.
Leslie Ludtke
Concord