We aren’t anywhere near the point of specific proposals to overhaul our state’s tax structure, but we all know that redoing the way we tax businesses is going to be a big part of it. The issue, as always, is hoe to do it fairly. Let’s just say for now that my definition of “fair” favors broader-based taxes with fewer loopholes and exceptions. Let’s also just say for now that I’ll be shocked if that’s what we actually get, given the array of interests and lobbies that will work overtime to ensure that their clients get excepted in the name of truth, justice, and promoting a good climate for bidness in this here state, not to mention the lily-livered nature of the state leadership, especially when it has to push back on its overlords. But I can hope.
Do remember that all of this is being done in the name of making public school finance secure and adequate. What’s not being addressed but is also in dire need is financing for higher education. This Statesman article gives a good view of the situation, and it ain’t pretty. We know that one of the tacks those don’t-tax-my-business lobbies will take is to proclaim that taxing their little piece of capitalist heaven will be bad for the state’s economy. What’s the price of doing nothing?
State Demographer Steve Murdock sees a bleak future if current higher education trends go unchecked: declining household income, more poverty, more crime, higher incarceration rates, more people on food stamps. His projections show average household income declining by roughly $5,000 between 2000 and 2030, producing a ripple effect that would cost the state’s economy many billions of dollars.
Yet the state’s business community, with a few exceptions, has not sounded the alarm.
We can pay now, or we can pay later. The choice is ours. Latter link via Lasso.
I would suggest the problems facing higher ed in Texas are much more complicated than “pay now or pay later.”
How to pay? What mechanisms? Maybe students should pick up more? And the feds? And what else should we do, in overseeing our universities?
What do I mean by those questions?
Just a few quick examples.
The minute someone suggests students come up with more of the burden in the form of tuition, there’s just screeching from some quarters. Fine — what’s their funding mechanism given the current anti-tax preference of voters?
Further, how to handle institutions like A&M and UT, which exercise great influence in ensuring other universities (notably Tech and UH) don’t begin to encroach on a certain status level?
And what happens when those two institutions decide they need redundant programs in, say, Houston, just because they can?
Higher ed in Texas needs a close look. I’m certain we agree on that. We don’t agree if you’re suggesting that the only thing higher ed needs is more money from the state.
And as for the unique problems facing the Hispanic community in Texas — I think that’s much more complex than is conveyed by a few sentences in this article. I know it’s complex enough that I don’t have enough facts at my disposal to make a good policy assessment. But I will certainly agree that it’s a concern.
I would suggest the problems facing higher ed in Texas are much more complicated than “pay now or pay later.”
Sure, they are. But money goes a long way to solving a lot of our current educational problems.
How to pay? What mechanisms? Maybe students should pick up more? And the feds? And what else should we do, in overseeing our universities?
We’ve already seen tuition hikes of anywhere from 10-30% in the last two years. I think students are already “picking up more”. More money from the feds would be nice, but with the current administration, I wouldn’t get my hopes up. We probably should just count on our own means, as a state. If you think universities need some kind of specific, additional oversight, put forth the idea. Oversight costs money, remember.
The minute someone suggests students come up with more of the burden in the form of tuition, there’s just screeching from some quarters. Fine — what’s their funding mechanism given the current anti-tax preference of voters?
Well, since you didn’t say who “they” were, I can’t answer for them. For myself, I’d say a good choice to increase revenue on a fair, state-wide basis would be a state income tax. The really poor folks wouldn’t have to get hit, and the middle class and rich folks would get to deduct the state tax from their federal tax. Everybody wins!
Further, how to handle institutions like A&M and UT, which exercise great influence in ensuring other universities (notably Tech and UH) don’t begin to encroach on a certain status level?
Ummm, A&M and UT are *Systems*, and in fact, they are both trying to make sure that the other schools in their systems have a chance to grow in prestige and quality, so that they will be able to rival the “flagships” of the systems. They need to do this, in order to take some of the enrollment pressure off of the main campuses.
The state university system is also doing its best to bring its members up in quality.
And what happens when those two institutions decide they need redundant programs in, say, Houston, just because they can?
Well, they have to apply for permission to offer those programs in those places, just like any other institution would.
Higher ed in Texas needs a close look. I’m certain we agree on that. We don’t agree if you’re suggesting that the only thing higher ed needs is more money from the state.
Again, money doesn’t solve all problems, but the problems we have right now would be ameliorated considerably by more money: enrollment is way up, class sizes are way up, buildings are starting to overflow. More money would mean more building, more professors, more scholarships, etc. More education is generally good for society and our economy.
And as for the unique problems facing the Hispanic community in Texas — I think that’s much more complex than is conveyed by a few sentences in this article. I know it’s complex enough that I don’t have enough facts at my disposal to make a good policy assessment. But I will certainly agree that it’s a concern.
And part of the reason it’s a concern is because not enough Hispanics are heading into higher education. They are especially susceptible to issues of cost and distance. The more college costs go up, the fewer Hispanics and low-income kids we will have in college. That equation is pretty simple, actually.
So, you keep repeating that more money isn’t the answer. I agree it’s not the only answer. But you seem to think more money won’t help the situation, and that is also an inaccurate simplification.
The higher ed problems are real. But, as the Statesman article and a recent article in the Austin Chronicle pointed out*, one of the biggest challenges facing higher ed is the large proportion of students who are not ready for college.
This brings us back to public school funding and curricula. This is the keystone issue confronting Texas. Unfortunately, the Republican leadership’s proposed solution of appraisal caps and a statewide property tax will do nothing to address the problem. The problem is that property taxes are no longer sufficient and appropriate for funding our educational system. Our reliance on property taxes is a legacy of the 19th Century when most wealth was held as property. That is no longer the case. But, here we are trying to run a 21st Century economy on a 19th Century tax structure.
The Legislature has got to come up with a new, broadly based means for funding our public schools and community colleges. A means that will shift the tax burden away from homeowners.
Jeb
* http://www.austinchronicle.com/issues/dispatch/2005-02-04/pols_feature.html