Proposition 38 isn’t perfect, but neither is Proposition 30


Hang on for a minute...we're trying to find some more stories you might like.

Email This Story

Proposition 38, or as supporters refer to as the “Our Children, Our Future: Local Schools and Early Education Investment Act”, is similar to Proposition 30 in that it’s aimed at raising taxes in order to support our education. To quote the official voter information guide on Proposition 38, “education is our future because children are our future…”

This quote is true; education will be the means through which they will gain the skills needed to get a job in the increasing high-tech environment of today workforce. The wording of Proposition 38 clearly calls for raising the state income tax rate of all Californians on the grounds that we should all share the burden and the benefit in educating the current and future generations.

However, there is a small problem. If Proposition 38 passes, no money raised will be spent on colleges or universities; rather all the funds raised will go towards funding K-12, elementary, middle schools and high schools. This is why the Board of Trustees of the California State University has taken steps to increase tuition by five percent if Proposition 30 doesn’t pass.

This is clearly a failing for Proposition 38; should it pass and Proposition 30 fails to pass, colleges and universities across California will be forced to make cuts that will have an impact on their student population and their staff. Thus, it’s in our best interest that Proposition 30 actually passes while Proposition 38 doesn’t.

While Proposition 38 uses the words “education is our future because children are our future…” and “investing in our school and early childhood program to prepare children to succeed”, it fails to address the needs of colleges and universities where they actually learn the skills and knowledge needed to be able to compete in the present workforce and global economy.

Proposition 38 guarantees that schools and communities get the funding that they need and the chance to have their own input into how that money will be used. Proposition 38 will also make it a felony to misuse these funds, prohibiting legislature from touching the funds or schools from using the fund to pay for salaries, pensions, or benefits. Finally, it sets aside money to reduce the state deficit.

In effect, Proposition 38 makes schools a priority by ensuring that parents, teachers, schools, and community members have a say in how the money will be used rather than leaving the decision in the hands of the legislature, but in doing so it creates additional red tape that will hinder schools bureaucratically.

Sacramento may not be able to touch the $10 billion generated by Proposition 38, but it does have the option of cutting or deferring other funding available to schools throughout California currently. Schools could very well end up with either less money or more depending on the future actions of Sacramento.

It will result in generating the funding needed to fund schools throughout California, especially with the funding cuts to education enacted by Sacramento in the last few years.