Beware of those who would attach the word “fair” to government largesse. In the context of taxes, “fair” invariably means “more.” Those who have clogged our court systems seeking increased school funding want us to believe that they’re acting out of a desire for “fairness.”Yes, the way we fund education is profoundly unfair, but the proposed solutions are even worse. Why doesn’t education funding work like so many other support systems, such as SNAP and subsidized housing? We don’t unconditionally subsidize food and housing regardless of need. There is no reason for the one-size-fits-none education model we have today.
What the “fairness” peddlers aren’t telling us is that their solution would only make things worse, as seen in Connecticut which enacted an income tax for education to replace “unfair” property taxes. Now they have both. Schools haven’t improved, but people are paying a lot more for them. Instead, let parents choose their school. If they have genuine need, they could receive financial aid. A need-only based subsidy would eliminate the anti-competitive incentive to choose a school based on government fiat. This would drive down costs and drive up quality, as every student would have equal opportunity.
Jim Peschke
Croydon