• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

What if the money for education was redistributed throughout all districts in the state?

J

JazzBaseball

New member
Joined
Nov 4, 2018
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
What if the money for education was redistributed throughout all districts in the state?

Instead of money only going towards the school district you lived in what if it all went into a central fund and was then redistributed among all school districts in the state?

Could this even out some of the poor school districts funding issues?

Or should this idea be expanded beyond the state level?

What pros and cons do you so see?
 
JazzBaseball said:
What if the money for education was redistributed throughout all districts in the state?

Instead of money only going towards the school district you lived in what if it all went into a central fund and was then redistributed among all school districts in the state?

Could this even out some of the poor school districts funding issues?

Or should this idea be expanded beyond the state level?

What pros and cons do you so see?
Click to expand...

Cons are taxation w/o representation. The higher the level of government that is placed in charge of something then the less influence each voter/taxpayer has over it. Once you lose the ability to 'vote with your feet' then you have lost a huge advantage.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Cons are taxation w/o representation. The higher the level of government that is placed in charge of something then the less influence each voter/taxpayer has over it. Once you lose the ability to 'vote with your feet' then you have lost a huge advantage.
Click to expand...

Would that be true on the state level as well? Some wouldn't be represented?
 
JazzBaseball said:
Would that be true on the state level as well? Some wouldn't be represented?
Click to expand...

Yes, because the state does not tax equally yet would seek to spend equally. For example, Houston, TX has more students than San Antonio, TX yet Houston has one school district while San Antonio has 13 school districts (more administrative overhead). Some areas just elect to spend foolishly and that would not change under a state funded but locally controlled school system.
 
Last edited:
JazzBaseball said:
What if the money for education was redistributed throughout all districts in the state?

Instead of money only going towards the school district you lived in what if it all went into a central fund and was then redistributed among all school districts in the state?

Could this even out some of the poor school districts funding issues?

Or should this idea be expanded beyond the state level?

What pros and cons do you so see?
Click to expand...

Local funding has already been ruled unconstitutional in Ohio. But it's so ingrained that implementation of state funding keeps getting pushed back. My town still votes on school levies. I don't know if those will go away completely, or if it will be supplemental to the (eventual) state funding, but all of this is post-ruling.

I'm not sure, but I think the issue is in how to shift school funding from locally-determined property taxes to state-wide income taxes. Not an easy issue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom