A tax reform plan to fund K-12, higher education and more — at less cost to nearly all of us

April 22, 2015 | John Burbank

John Burbank, EOI Executive Director

John Burbank, EOI Executive Director

The Legislature is at loggerheads, with the Democrat-controlled House and the Republican-controlled Senate far apart in their proposed budgets.

Neither party has a long-term plan for fully funding K-12 education, higher education, mental health, public employee contracts and teacher cost-of-living adjustments. Why not? Because neither party has the will to implement systemic changes in our tax system. But, as our state treasurer, Jim McIntire, states, “it is mathematically impossible to sustain any education system with our state’s shrinking tax base.”

To be fair, the Democrats are much more fiscally responsible in their proposal, with a capital gains tax on the wealthy generating about $500 million. To put that in perspective, that’s $10 a week for each student in our K-12 system. We are not going to meet our constitutional obligation to fund basic education with that minimal increase.

What Democrats and Republicans are proposing will not lower class sizes in grades 4 through 12, violating Initiative 1351, which we passed just last fall. The Democrats would freeze college tuition at the same high levels as today, while increasing funding for the state need grant, so that it will be available for 83,000 low income students. This still leaves out about 20,000 low income students, who won’t get any assistance at all.

The Republicans have a more magical approach. Sprinkled throughout their proposal are “LEAN” savings, which have no detail and no rationale, just numbers to be saved by unspecified efficiencies. They refuse to consider new taxes on the wealthy, and they open up new tax loopholes for businesses! They cut tuition for UW, WSU, and the regional universities, but not for community college students. They also actually cut funding for the state need grant for higher education.

So we have the Democrats in the House supporting high tuition and incrementally increasing funding for low income students, and Republicans in the Senate dropping tuition across the board while cutting funding for state need grants. There are elements of good in each proposal. It makes no sense to have tuition eat up 22 percent of the median family income. But that is exactly what UW tuition does.

It makes no sense to leave low-income kids out of the equation for college because they can’t get tuition assistance. You could argue that the Republicans are talking to the middle class with college aspirations, while the Democrats are talking to striving low income kids. That is just the divide which enables neither party to actually come up with the systemic funding for public higher education.

In reacting to the Republican proposal, Rep. Ross Hunter said, “My neighbors in Medina get their tuition reduced, which is nice, but not necessary,” The problem with this is that the median household income in Medina is greater than $160,000. But for the folks in Everett, where the median household income is $44,000, or for that matter, for families across our state of Washington, which has a median household income of $57,000, decreasing tuition is a big deal. It opens up a door to advancement for their kids who may not be poor enough to get any need grants, and yet without enough income to enable them to go to college. You try paying $13,000 tuition on a $57,000 income!

Of course, as state Treasurer McIntire has emphasized, we can’t lower tuition and increase state need grants with our current tax system. We can’t fully fund K-12 education or early learning. We can’t take care of the mentally ill. We can’t meet our contractual obligations to public employees.

Instead, McIntire proposes we decrease the sales tax, eliminate the state property tax, reduce the business tax, and institute a flat 5 percent income tax. If the Legislature implemented this, then we would have the resources to fund K-12 education, higher education and all the public services we take for granted. Our state treasurer has thrown down the gauntlet. Now the Legislature should take it up.

Posted in Column, Tax and Budget, Tax Reform

Comments

  1. Jeanne Large says:

    Treasurer McIntire has given us an opportunity to educate and prepare residents and elected officials of Washington State for an important decision that will be made in 2016 by the legislature. It looks like McIntire read the 2002 Tax Study Commission report! It’s a fact is that our current revenue system doesn’t work. Let’s get one that does….and is fair to all.

  2. Martha Koester says:

    Reduce the sales tax by exactly how much? Our state property tax is $363.33. With a fixed income of $44K, we are a few thousand over the eligibility limit for senior housing in Seattle. $2200 would be a major hit for retirees unless the sales tax reduction was significant.

Leave a Reply

Search the blog

Subscribe to the blog

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Like what you’re reading?
Reader support helps preserve our independent voice for the middle class - please chip in to help out!