Once again, Colorado voters decided that higher education in the state is not a priority, and is unworthy of public funding. Earlier this week, Coloradans rejected Proposition 103, which would have created “a five-year timeout from education cuts by raising around $3 billion over five years for preschool, K-12 education and higher education.” By rejecting a small rise in sales tax (2.9% to 3.0%), and a small increase in income tax (4.63% to 5%), we have said to no to educating our children for a brighter tomorrow. We have said no to keeping Colorado competitive in the country. Colorado’s funding for higher education was already ranked a dismal 49th place out of 50 states. This no vote has ensured our place among the worst in valuing higher education.
Clearly, fear has motivated people to look short term, instead of long-term, at the future of our great state. “A Colorado family making the median income of $55,700 will pay about $132 a year. That is only 40 cents a day to stop education cuts.” Forty cents a day! That is an eighth of a cup of your daily coffee at Starbucks! With all of the SUV’s on the road, and the cost of gas, that might get us a mile down the road, if we’re lucky. Due to the poor economy, higher education has endured budget cuts over the past three years, and are running extremely tight ships. With the rejection of Prop 103, we are faced with a fourth year of cuts. Many schools have trimmed budgets and staffs to the bare-bones minimum. Staff members are being asked to take on more responsibilities and create new initiatives, even while attendance is exploding. At some point in the near future, I believe that we are going to reach a breaking point. In general, Americans are already overworked, and take off less time than co-workers across the globe. With resources and time being stretched ever-thinner, we are going to reach a point where performing our jobs will become impossible. We are simply going to burn out, and Colorado has chosen to let us burn and then spit us out.
The students at our colleges and universities are also suffering. Here in Colorado, tuition costs have risen over 43% in the past five years. As funding for colleges gets cut, administrations often have no choice other than to raise tuition. This also comes on the heels of reduced federal funding for higher education, producing a larger burden on students. Student loan debt recently passed the $1 trillion mark, outpacing credit card debt for the first time. From the Vote Yes on 103 website: “This is not the kind of higher education system Colorado needs. We need colleges that are accessible to all Coloradans. Colleges and universities provide essential job training and work skills for future employees and employers. Continuing to undermine our higher education system will only undermine our economy.”
Soon, hopefully, this country will realize that in order to fix the economy, we all must make sacrifices. Our parents and grandparents realized this when recovering from the Great Depression. Solving the woes of the economy will not come on the backs of cutting funding, as the Tea Party likes to tout. Government services can only be cut and stretched so far. Higher taxes are needed to get us out of this recession. We each need to sacrifice to help turn our country around.
Steve, I appreciate this heartfelt post. I struggled to try to come up with a legitimate "devil's advocate" response to try to articulate why someone would vote against 103, but couldn't. The only rationale I can come up with is that people just vote down any and every tax increase on the bill. It's very disappointing. I'm encouraged that some politicians remained hopeful, saying this needs to continue to be a conversation and we need to keep working.
ReplyDeleteI tried to think from the neo-liberal perspective (higher education no longer provides a public good and is a personal commodity that should be invested in by the individual). I can see the rationale in thinking this way if we had a significant tax increase (like %7), but a .1% increase? Hard to rationalize. Sorry I don't have any answers, but I'm right there with you.
Steve, thank you for your post.
ReplyDeleteIt is unfortunate that Proposition 103 was rejected. I always wonder how misinformed voters make decisions that may have long-term negative consequences not only for their immediate family members but also for the entire citizens in the state. The data provided speaks of the minimal investment that a Colorado family would have needed to contribute to stop educational cuts, only 40 cents a day.
Investing in K-20 education is always a guarantee for the future of families, communities and society as whole. Perhaps, as you indicate, fear played a decisive role in the voters’ minds. I also think that a measure proposing tax increases serves as a deterrent for many voters who might not have reflected on the specifics of the preposition.
I am also hopeful that the dialogue will continue and perhaps we will see some changes in the future
Ugh. Isn't this so sad? I'm going to have to agree with Beau above--voters are just saying NO to any and every increase in taxes. Colordans who may view themselves as "accomplished" and not in need of the education system anymore are turning a sharp shoulder to the issue at hand. I completely agree with your comment about burnout--we say no to forty cents/day, and our children can work for years longer to pay back what they supposedly "owe" to our state. I agree with Aldo as well--voters are mainly just misinformed. How many of these individuals see a bill on a voting form and immediately know what they are voting for? That's a problem for voters in every aspect, not just education. I know my first trip to vote at age 18, I voted for politicians whose names I liked the best! Ahh, how sad am I!? Maybe we need to start asking voters for rationale in additional to a simple yes or no answer!
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately, that higher education reached to this low level of federal support and specifically the lack of state support. I believe that any person in the world has the right of health, housing, education and freedom; these are the four elements that indicate a high level and advancement of nations or vice versa.
ReplyDeleteUnited States of America was characterized in higher education and not in public education. Now, and we are in the third millennium, which rely on the information revolution, which will be achieved only through development in the quality of higher education, which is the increased spending on it is the solution to all problems and the decline of its level.
I think it became something shameful to talk or even think of reducing spending on education in general and higher education in particular if the nation wants to lead the world in this difficult and complicated millennium.
This is always a tough issue, I think, among communities. I re-read the analysis of Prop 103 and I see why folks voted against it. Prop 103 suggested raising taxes for public education but it did not state how it would be divided. So, if it would have passed there would have been a possibility our community voted for a proposition that may have not even benefited higher education. I can see where the doubt comes in.
ReplyDeleteCould we not see a proposition in five years to keep this increase instead of returning the tax back to its current state if we were to see that Coloradoans could handle the additional tax increase? Additionally, it would only be 40cents a day if you make 55,700 - how many of us can say we are making that salary? How many Coloradoans can say they can afford another tax? Apparently, enough to vote down proposition 103.
I agree we need to find a way to sustain our public education but we need to find a more sustainable way. A quick fix 5-year tax does not seem to be the best way according to our community. In my view, we need to show our communities we have a better plan for systemic change of how we fund our education system.
Karla, I appreciate your look at the other side. I think we all have that little part of us that is selfish and doesn't want a tax increase regardless of what it is for or how much it is. However, what I struggle with is what has to happen for something to give? The Prop didn't say how it was going to be split but if it was going to education in Colorado, does it really matter? We're all on the higher ed bandwagon but I think we all know K-12 needs it too. Seems to me that almost every tax payer knows SOMEONE in either K-12 or higher education that could benefit from this passing.
ReplyDeleteThe frightening thing to me is what someone else already said - access. Just like so many of our conversations revolve around, at what point is a college education not attainable for everyone anymore? Honestly, I think we've reached that point. As I just said in another comment, UNC isn't even accessible for many students now and we're a public institution. When tuition is going up and up and financial aid seems to be dwindling, it's hard to say that you're all about access when you see the reality that everyone may not be able to get a college degree...or perhaps they "can" like other blogs have mentioned but at what cost?
While I appreciate Karla's insight, much like everyone else, I'm frustrated and disheartened (not that you're not Karla :)).
OK, I will publicly confess that I voted against Prop 103 (sorry Steve). I voted against it for a few reasons - first, it does not specify how the money would be divided and spent and I have experienced too many examples of the (likely) good intentions behind a piece of legislation end up being a mess upon implementation. Second, I would assume that the author of the legislation placed the five year limit to try and convince "on the fence" voters that the increase wouldn't be around forever, so they could rest easier that they weren't voting for a permanent tax increase...I don't see the temporary nature of Prop 103 as a positive thing; it's just delaying the inevitable and in five years we will still be dealing with budget issues. Which brings me to my final reason...a ballot initiative like Prop 103 is not the answer, finally doing something regarding TABOR is the actual answer.
ReplyDeleteAs a CPA, many of my clients would not be too pleased to know that I voted for Prop 103. I am supposed to be upholding the idea that "we" already pay too much in taxes. However, as I researched the amount of money already taken away from education in the past year in Colorado and the projections for the upcoming cuts...I felt I had to vote in favor of the Proposition. I did also see Prop 103 as a bandaid but a bandaid that would at least cover the wound for a 5 year period.
ReplyDeleteEven though I voted for the Proposition, I had a strong feeling it would not pass! There are way too many Coloradoans that are struggling financially right now. Too many without jobs, too many that have taken pay cuts and too many business on the verge of closing down. I didn't really see how it would pass.
I am fearful for what the budget cuts will be next year not only to k-12 but to higher education. I am certain that many positions will be cut and that many programs will suffer.
Good luck Colorado....
I believe the future of Colorado lay in education the population. Being I and my family are residents here we are included in this lack of support expressed by the voters and by state government.
ReplyDeleteMy wife and I already work with our children on their homework and tutor them so they do well in school and have a vested interest in learning. I can't help but wonder at what point we will decide to pull the children out of public education altogether and provide home schooling. While I do not want to deny our children the life building experiences from attending school (or rely solely on one income) I want their education to sufficiently prepare them so they can have a choice in what they will do in life.