I guess I am not really elated, it should have failed by a lot more. There will be a reconsideration tomorrow. There was one excused vote today. It could still eventually pass.
I have said from the beginning any plan that uses an increase in sales taxes is short-sighted and fiscally irresponsible.
Think about it, just for a moment. While almost half of school kids in the SF School District get free or reduced lunches (because their parents are living in poverty and can’t afford to buy food) the solution for higher teacher pay is to RAISE the tax on food that these student’s parents can’t afford. I guess as long as teacher’s can afford to buy themselves lunch, the FEDs will continue to feed the needy.
There are options, SEVERAL options;
• Use 100% of lottery money to fund education by upping the state’s take.
• Equalize school administrator pay with teacher pay (we are 26th in the nation for admin pay).
• Reduce reserves of school districts and funnel that money towards teacher pay. I have never understood putting tax dollars in savings accounts. Either spend it, or give it back.
• Eliminate several sales tax exemptions like on advertising.
• Equalize ag land property taxes with urban taxes. Let’s face it, farming is more and more a corporate venture not a small family business.
• Implement more taxes on tourism.
We have options, hundreds of options. Raising taxes on food, utilities and clothing is short sighted and counter productive. Let’s raise teacher pay, but let’s do it in an educated way and responsibly.
I realize the Democrats in Pierre want to be a part of the answer and not a part of the problem, when it comes to their new found support for our current sales tax mechanism in South Dakota to fund increase pay for teachers, but this assumes they will get some of the credit for its passage, if it eventually does, but they won’t.
However, they will be on record in support of the sales tax as an equitable form of taxation, which is a sad mistake.
In 2010, Democratic gubernatorial candidate Scott Heidepriem claimed there was a pending educational crisis in South Dakota, while Republican gubernatorial candidate Dennis Daugaard claimed there wasn’t.
Well, Scott was right and Dennis was wrong, but what Scott also said in 2010 was that the money was there within our current revenue and reserves to resolve this problem. I believe he claimed there were over $ 1 billion dollars in reserves which could be tapped or manipulated to address the “educational crisis” without raising taxes.
Now, speed forward six years later and we find that Dennis Daugaard finally recognizes the “educational crisis,” but the Democrats instead of trying to find the funding for teacher pay from current revenues and or the reserve funds have decided to be co-opted on the issue of the legitimacy of sales taxes as an equitable form of taxation, which is very sad.
Don’t get me wrong, I believe the teachers need a significant pay increase in this state, but is there not a greater majority to be found on the issue by bringing the most conservative of the Republicans to the table by advocating the use of general revenue and reserve funds instead of an increase in the sales tax to fund an increase in teacher pay; and would not such a move not only be successful, but also allow the Democratic Party in South Dakota to be truthful to its long standing position that sales taxes are regressive and should be limited or ended and not legitimized through an enhance dependency upon them?
The Democrats were against a sales tax increase in the 1980s, when then Governor Mickelson advocated them for REDI funds and they opposed Governor Janklow’s gross receipt tax (“the sick tax” or a backdoor sales tax) on medical receipts in the 1990s. Because they understand that sales taxes were a regressive form of taxation. What has changed, I ask?
The Democrats current support for Daugaard’s plan and even their own plan which replaces the food sales tax with a 1% increase in the sale tax for all other transactions are merely attempts to be relevant in a debate which they will never get credit for; but they are at risk of losing their mantra of being for the poor and working poor when they help to continue the legitimacy of sales taxes as an acceptable and thus equitable form of taxation.
The Democrats in Pierre in supporting the increase in a sales tax for education remind me of the national Democrats in the 1990s who broke with Party tradition and supported NAFTA and the free trade mantra all for the sake of being relevant or should we say “New Democrats.”
Democrats will never be successful Democrats as long as we continue to try to be “kinder and gentler” Republicans. It is not our job as Democrats to impress. Rather, it is our job to stay true to what we claim to be and a sales tax increase, even if it is for the students and teachers and might seem to solve a problem, only further makes us irrelevant as a political party and makes me wonder what it is all about, when one party mimics another party rather than offering a legitimate and equitable contrast, and in turn, loses its identity to affect future change – change, which will eventually be necessary, if we truly want lasting and adequate funding for education in the future.
Holy Chite…..I find myself in complete agreement with your above statements Detroit Lewis.
when the sales tax increase for education was on the ballot last time, i would’ve voted for it, if sanford and avera weren’t also trying to get their hands on the money.
Teachers need more pay or they’ll leave the state for better opportunity. What’s not acceptable is inferior teachers for impoverished students. Good educators and schools is the best way to lift the lower class. Agreed, it shouldn’t come from more sales tax. I already buy tax free on line and food and clothing from Worthington or Minneapolis. A higher would be more sales migration and less in state retail.