It is no secret that conservatives dislike even the concept of federal involvement in what they see as strictly state or local issues. Certainly no better example of this is the US Department of Education - even the suggestion of its elimination is guaranteed to bring cheers from right-wing audiences, who resent having even well-meaning bureaucrats (and not all are) lecture school systems across the nation on assorted minutiae which might or might not be appropriate for their particular communities (and which might or might not actually be for "education"!).
But now that federal income taxes have been supplementing locally-generated revenues, how do you eliminate the "federal" without eliminating the "funding", since the revenue levels are now more-or-less built into the system? Some of the total could be eliminated just by wiping away the cost of compliance, i.e. the expense assumed by school systems to ensure all federal funding is utilized in accordance with the laws and regulations (aka "strings") under which the monies were provided.
Could, perhaps, some calculation be made to determine what percentage of today's federal income tax goes to primary and secondary education? That percentage could then be deducted from federal income tax owed, either as a deduction against income or as a credit against what is currently defined as the total federal tax liability on any given tax return, and credited to that state's revenues.
This is far from an ideal solution. Its greatest fault, perhaps, is that it is not a long-term solution; this is not a practical device over the long term. Also, it introduces a new complication into the areas of the tax code regarding personal income taxes which, as I have opined elsewhere, should be devoid of such complications. It will not reduce overall tax liabilities, but then, it isn't intended to do so; it is intended to be revenue-neutral for both the federal government and the school district. It will give mischief-makers at the state level an opportunity to play games with all the extra cash - citizens will need to demand their state legislatures keep track of how much revenue is derived and insist it is apportioned in an equitable manner. Likewise, at the local level, citizens will need to involve themselves to make sure the local school boards, no longer under the yoke of federal spending restrictions, do not then make free with what is still the taxpayer's money - one occurrence of Bell, CA, is quite enough, thank you.
So, then, this is a first step towards returning control of schools to the local level, or, at the very least, to the states. These are not federal schools, nor should they be. But at present, every federal dollar brings more federal intrusion; every federal dollar moves control of our childrens' education closer to Washington, DC, and away from parents.
But now that federal income taxes have been supplementing locally-generated revenues, how do you eliminate the "federal" without eliminating the "funding", since the revenue levels are now more-or-less built into the system? Some of the total could be eliminated just by wiping away the cost of compliance, i.e. the expense assumed by school systems to ensure all federal funding is utilized in accordance with the laws and regulations (aka "strings") under which the monies were provided.
Could, perhaps, some calculation be made to determine what percentage of today's federal income tax goes to primary and secondary education? That percentage could then be deducted from federal income tax owed, either as a deduction against income or as a credit against what is currently defined as the total federal tax liability on any given tax return, and credited to that state's revenues.
This is far from an ideal solution. Its greatest fault, perhaps, is that it is not a long-term solution; this is not a practical device over the long term. Also, it introduces a new complication into the areas of the tax code regarding personal income taxes which, as I have opined elsewhere, should be devoid of such complications. It will not reduce overall tax liabilities, but then, it isn't intended to do so; it is intended to be revenue-neutral for both the federal government and the school district. It will give mischief-makers at the state level an opportunity to play games with all the extra cash - citizens will need to demand their state legislatures keep track of how much revenue is derived and insist it is apportioned in an equitable manner. Likewise, at the local level, citizens will need to involve themselves to make sure the local school boards, no longer under the yoke of federal spending restrictions, do not then make free with what is still the taxpayer's money - one occurrence of Bell, CA, is quite enough, thank you.
So, then, this is a first step towards returning control of schools to the local level, or, at the very least, to the states. These are not federal schools, nor should they be. But at present, every federal dollar brings more federal intrusion; every federal dollar moves control of our childrens' education closer to Washington, DC, and away from parents.
