VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, [2], 3, 4 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 12:19:51 01/22/03 Wed
Author: Jane Hamilton
Subject: Act 60 is a good law.

I read Robert Baral’s essay on why he feels that Act 60? Should be repealed. I disagree with it. Here is why:

Mr Baral wrote: “It was our State Supreme Court that dictated that such a law be passed. The Vermont State Supreme Court has NO constitutional right to dictate to the legislature and executive branches [sic] what laws they will make. The function of the court is to judge if a law already in effect, dutifully passed by the legislature and signed by the executive, is constitutional.”

In fact Vermont Supreme Court ruled that the education-funding scheme that Vermont had was unconstitutional. It dictated nothing. Supreme Courts in Maine and Texas made similar rulings in the 1990s.

Mr Baral wrote: “G-D commands us, “Thou shalt not steal” (Exodus 12:15). This applies to all men, whether private citizens or government servants of the people.

Act 60 does not endorse theft. It is a property tax bill. The property tax is commonly used by states to raise money for state services.

Mr Baral wrote: “I don’t think our State government should be literally taxing modest-income people out of their homes with oppressive and exorbitant school property taxes.”

The state wide tax rate allowed most towns to spend the same amount on schools, while taxing their residents less. In most towns the sole cause of higher property taxes is local residents who vote for increased spending in school budgets.

Mr Baral wrote: “Local taxpayers need to retain control of their school property tax budgets. What does some pompous, imperial State government bureaucrat in Montpelier know about the educational needs of local communities?”

Local school boards still decide how much money schools spend per child. Local school boards decide on the curriculum. Local school boards are in full control of their schools.

Mr Baral wrote: “Somewhere in our State bureaucracy, someone arbitrarily proclaimed that, to give “equitable education” to our school children, we must spend $6,000 (or whatever the figure is) per public school child. Nonsense! Throwing more tax dollars at the public schools does NOT equal “equitable education!” My wife and I home schooled our child for 3 years at $300/year.”

The per child block grant is $5,200 per child per year.
I don’t think that there is a school board in the state that would want to spend only $300 per child.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]
[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT-8
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.