The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly

The Good

On Tuesday, 17 NOV, Sam Rohrer announced his bid for governor of Pennsylvania!! Who is Sam Rohrer? Please go to the web site http://www.samrohrer.org/ and you can watch and hear the man who will be our next governor. It is said that a picture is worth a thousand words and it is certainly true. I could go on and on about the man and his attributes but I feel I could not adequately describe my respect for Sam. He has been working tirelessly for us Pennsylvanians in his attempts to have the House Bill (HB) 1275 passed but has been thwarted by special interest groups. The lobbyists for those groups have influenced other politicians in Harrisburg to vote against him and his HB. We're still working on it though.

The Bad

On Thursday, 19 NOV, a repeat of the meeting in Oxford, PA the previous Thursday was held at the fire house in Parkesburg, PA. Once again, Tom Houghton, a State representative from Chester County, was the speaker. He presented essentially the same information heard at the Oxford meeting with one exception. He announced that he: "Had signed on to HB 1275". Now I ask you, if he indeed has "signed on to HB 1275", why would he continue to tout the benefits of some other HB? Specifically, the HB he is promoting is yet another HB that promises to "abolish school / property taxes"!!! That bill is HB 1965 introduced by another politician, Tim Seip of Berks County.

Let's compare the two House Bills, each of which promises to abolish school / property taxes. The first thing that is noticed is the dramatic difference in the number of pages between the two. HB 1965 (Seip's bill) requires just ten (10) pages to supposedly satisfy the monumental task of abolishing school / property taxes (SPT) and at the same time, providing funding for the continuence of education. Wow!!! Now that is a very clever trick and in just 10 pages. Meanwhile, HB 1275 (Rohrer's bill) is spelled out in two hundred and six (206) pages!! One may accuse Rohrer of being verbose or that his HB covers virtually every contingency.

Comparison of Good and Bad

Let's look a little closer at the two House Bills:

1. Forever abolishes SPT for homesteads & farmsteads
HB 1275 - SPT is totally eliminated as a method of taxation and is
constitutionally guaranteed never to return.

HB 1965 - Not possible to eliminate the SPT using the method in the bill.
Plan does not generate sufficient revenue to totally eliminate SPT

2. Eliminates taxes like the local school EIT & per capita tax
HB 1275 - Yes - with only the exception noted below in #3

HB 1965 - No

3. Does not allow schools to levy taxes without voter approval
HB 1275 - Yes - Local EIT or PIT allowed for special projects ONLY with voter
referendum

HB 1965 - No

4. Education cost controls
HB 1275 - Limits growth in school expenditures to the rate of inflation or
available revenue

HB 1965 - None

5. Guarantees minimum per-pupil funding to all schools
HB 1275 Yes - In accordance with the 2007 costing-out study; no longer will
the quality of a student's education be dependent on their Zip Code. In
addition, all schools will initially be fully funded to meet current obligations.

HB 1965 - No

6. Adjusts school district funding with changes in student population
HB 1275 Yes - Unlike the current 1991 school funding formula that gives
windfalls to some districts while shortcoming others as student populations
increase or decrease.

HB 1965 - No

7. Eliminates district-to-district taxing inequity
HB 1275 Yes - Districts without a large commercial tax base will no longer
depend solely on homeowners to fund education

HB 1965 - No

8. Education cost savings
HB 1275 Yes - Combines high-rate school debt into one low-rate state bond
issue; replaces all individual school healthcare plans with one state-level plan
Annual savings is approximately $ 1 billion

HB 1965 - None

9. Technology driven school program cost analysis for further savings
HB 1275 Yes - Data Driven Decision Making (D3M) technology supplied to all
school districts to guage curriculum cost effectiveness

HB 1965 - None

10. Replacement revenue source
HB 1275 Expanded sales tax base at current 6% rate with exemptions for life
necessities; 0.5% state PIT increase replaces eliminated local EIT. Revenue
sufficient to totally eliminate SPT.

HB 1965 Expanded sales tax base at current 6% rate with exemptions for life
necessities; generates insufficient revenue to totally eliminate SPT because of
unnecessary exemptions.

11. All taxes collected used for education funding thereby resulting in property tax
elimination
HB 1275 Yes - All revenue is deposited into a lockbox account to be used for
education finance ONLY

HB 1965 No - $ 1 billion of revenue is used for general fund expenditures during
first three years after enactment; no guarantee that this will not continue beyond
the scheduled cutoff date

12. Completely restructures the broken PA education finance system to align it
with 21st century reality
HB 1275 The property tax system is a 19th century holdover; distribution of state
funds to the schools is inequitable. The SPTEA restructures the way schools are
funded, bringing education finance into the 21st century

HB 1965 No

13. True education finance reform
HB 1275 Yes - The ONLY plan that accomplishes real reform

HB 1965 No

14. Taxpayer endorsement
HB 1275 Yes - Endorsed by 34 taxpayer advocacy groups statewide

HB 1965 None

Want to know more? Go to http://www.ptcc.us/ (Pennsylvania taxpayers Cyber Coalition) for a ton of information.

The Ugly

As noted above, a picture is worth a thousand words. Having said that, ckick on the following for a blockbuster. Make sure your sound is on. Once the picture starts, click on the news item regarding lost revenue for one school district in the upper right of the screen. Admittedly, it's a rather long web address but the video is worth it especially for all Pennsylvania school boards. http://wfmz.img.entriq.net/htm/PopUpPlayer-v3.htm?articleID=1300653

Semper Fidelis

Nurse John