Commentary & Community

Sanders Proposed Canceling Student Loan Debt

In his second campaign for the presidency, Sen. Bernie Sanders thinks he has an issue that will attract the votes of millennial voters – student loan debt forgiveness.


Under legislation that Sen. Sanders plans to introduce, nearly all individuals who have taken out student loans would see their debt wiped out. His plan includes:

  • Complete forgiveness of outstanding debt for any student loans made, guaranteed, or insured by the federal government;
  • Federal purchase and forgiveness of outstanding private loan debt upon application by the person who incurred the debt;
  • Providing new student loans through the federal government and capping these loans’ interest rates at 1.88%;
  • The elimination of tuition at public colleges; and
  • New subsidies for low-income students attending private colleges.


Under this plan, there would be no limits on eligibility based on family income. To pay for this $2.2 trillion plan, Sen. Sanders proposed a new tax on Wall Street transactions.


Sen. Sanders says that his plan will be Wall Street bailing out the average American. He argues that debt-free education should be something that every American is entitled to have. Opponents note that his plan would benefit the rich as well as the average American, and would be extremely expensive.


Do you think that the federal government should forgive all student loan debt, regardless of the income of the borrowers? Should public universities and colleges be tuition-free?

Biden Calls for More Federal Education Funding


Joe Biden is running for president, and he thinks that his path to the White House runs through the schoolhouse.


Speaking before the American Federation of Teachers yesterday, the former vice president laid out his education plan. The cornerstone of his proposal is a big increase in federal spending.


Currently, the federal government’s main education program is known as Title I. This sends federal money to low-income school districts. Under Biden’s plan, Title I spending would be tripled. He would earmark this money for teacher raises, pre-kindergarten expansion, and advanced courses (such as AP classes). He is also proposing more funding for school psychologists and efforts to diversify schools.


This plan represents a break from past federal education efforts, which aimed to tie funding to accountability measures. Under the Biden proposal, funds would flow regardless of test scores or other attempts to link the money to improved education outcomes.


Critics argue that this is simply a federal giveaway of taxpayer dollars without leveraging the money so states improve education. Supporters argue that poorer school districts need this money to catch up to their wealthier counterparts.


With his campaign just beginning, Biden is not proposing a bold new reform idea. Instead, he is appealing to a Democratic constituency -- teachers -- with a proposal that would provide more federal funding for them.


Do you think the federal government should increase education spending? Should federal dollars be tied to improved educational outcomes?

Armed Teachers Now Allowed in Florida

Yesterday Florida Governor Ron DeSantis signed legislation allowing school districts to arm teachers. In a state where the Parkland school shooting took place last year, this legislation has both strong supporters and detractors.


I the wake of the Parkland shooting, Florida enacted a law that allowed some school personnel to be armed. These personnel would undergo a background check and training. School boards would have to authorize this program in their district. Classroom teachers were excluded from this law.


Under this bill, school teachers would also be authorized to carry guns in the classroom. They must pass a psychological evaluation and a background check, then take training with the police.


The bill was controversial, with Republicans in the legislature pushing for it and Democrats opposing it. Those in favor of the bill noted that it was voluntary, so no teacher would be forced to carry a gun. They also pointed out that in many rural areas, it could take the police a long time to get to a school. Opponents of the bill said that it would make schools less safe with the potential for accidents.


Of the state’s 67 school districts, 25 have authorized some of their personnel to be armed. It is unclear how many will now permit teachers to do so, too.


Do you think that school teachers should be armed?

Warren Proposes Wiping out Student Debt with Wealth Tax

Senator Elizabeth Warren is trying to separate herself from a crowded field of Democratic candidates for president. Today she announced a plan that pairs two ideas that cause excitement for progressive activists: canceling student loan debt and a tax on wealthier Americans.


Under Sen. Warren’s plan, she would take revenue from her proposed annual tax on those who have more than $50 million in wealth and cancel student loans for millions of Americans. She calls for forgiveness of up to $50,000 of debt for people in households with an income under $100,000, and a partial cancelation of debt for those in households with incomes up to $250,000.


In addition, Sen. Warren has also proposed other reforms that she said would make college more affordable. These include elimination of tuition and fees at two-year and four-year institutions, expanding what federal Pell Grants can pay for, increase aid to historically black colleges and universities, and ban colleges from considering an applicant’s criminal history or citizenship status.


Supporter of Sen. Warren’s plan argue that student loan debt is overwhelming for many people. They say that this debt harms the economy by limiting the decisions that graduates can make. Opponents counter that those with debt should have the skills necessary to repay the debt, so taxpayers should not shoulder the burden. They also note that canceling this debt would disproportionately benefit the middle class and wealthier Americans.


Do you support canceling student loan debt? Should the government forbid colleges and universities from charging tuition?

Tuition-Free Community College Debated in Michigan

Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer wants state taxpayers to fund community college tuition for the state’s high school graduates. But critics are pushing back, citing the plan’s high cost, among other things.


Gov. Whitmer unveiled the “Michigan Opportunity Scholarship” plan as part of her state budget last month. This scholarship would pay for high school graduates to attend community college full time without paying tuition or fees. It would also provide money for students who attend four-year colleges and universities in the state.


Proponents of this idea contend that it will help increase higher education rates. They say that today’s workforce requires higher education, so it makes sense for taxpayers to provide funding for students to obtain that education. Opponents note that this plan would cost up to $100 million a year. They also contend that this program would benefit middle income and higher-income Michiganders, who can already afford community college tuition. Lower-income students already qualify for Pell Grants, which cover community college tuition.


The fate of this idea now rests with legislators.


Do you think that state governments should pay for students’ community college tuition and fees?

Trump signs College Free Speech Order

Over the past few years, incidents of speakers being shut down at colleges around the nation have increasingly made news. Now President Donald Trump has waded into the controversy, issuing an executive order aimed at bolstering free speech on college campuses.


In his executive order, the president has directed federal agencies to ensure that colleges receiving federal research funds “promote free enquiry” and that private colleges receiving federal funds comply with their stated free speech policies.


The order states that colleges should not “creat[e] environments that stifle competing perspectives.” It also says that “it is the policy of the federal government to encourage institutions to foster environments that promote open, intellectually engaging, and diverse debate.”


In some high-profile cases, speakers invited by conservative groups have been shouted down or disinvited from speaking on college campuses. These incidents have garnered the notice of President Trump, who has praised some of the speakers.


It is unclear how much of an effect this executive order will have, since the schools affected are already bound by constitutional free speech guarantees. It may give the federal government a tool to use if egregious instances are reported, however.


Do you think that colleges and universities should do more to protect free speech? What role should the federal government play in policing free speech conflicts on campus?

Teachers’ Strike Kills Charter Schools, Education Choice in W. Virginia

Charter schools and education savings accounts will not be coming to West Virginia this year. Teachers across the state walked out of school to protest legislation that would enact these education reforms as well as increase teacher salaries. Legislators adjourned without passing the bill, ending the two-day teacher walkout.


West Virginia is currently one of the few states where no charter schools operate. These are public schools that have more freedom in terms of curriculum and hiring. They offer a greater choice in the type of education offered, but critics say they harm traditional public schools. The legislation at issue would have made it easier for these schools to open in West Virginia. Another provision would have established education savings accounts, which parents could use to pay for private school tuition if their children have special needs or have been bullied. In addition, the legislation contained a pay raise for teachers and more money for educational support services.


Teachers walked off their jobs to hold a vigil at the state capitol in opposition. Every school system in the state except one closed because of a lack of teachers. Legislators adjourned without considering the bill, which killed it for this year.


Do you support charter schools? Should parents be able to use education savings accounts to pay for private school tuition or other education expenses?

Harvard Trial Could Have Big Impact on Affirmative Action

Does Harvard’s “race-conscious” admissions policy illegally discriminate against Asian-American students?

That is the question at the heart of the trial that began this week pitting a group of Asian-American students against the Ivy League college. The Supreme Court has ruled that schools cannot use racial quotas in admissions, but has allowed some consideration of race.


The students are suing Harvard under the theory that the school’s race-conscious admissions policy allows it to manipulate potential students’ scores to achieve a certain racial balance. They contend that Asian-American students receive lower scores in some areas to balance out their higher academic and extracurricular activity scores. They argue that a race-blind process would lead to more Asian-American students allowed into Harvard.

The school denies discriminating against Asian-American students. It says that diversity is an important goal for an academic community that would be undermined if the courts find that using race-conscious admissions is illegal.


The group Students for Fair Admissions has brought this lawsuit. Its spokesman has said that affirmative action is not the issue here, but this case could lead to the Supreme Court. If that happens, the high court would have the opportunity to decide whether or not any racial factors should be at play when schools decide whom to admit and whom to deny.


Do you think that race should be a factor in college admissions?


Education Tax Hike Initiative Bounced from Arizona Ballot

School funding continues to be a hot topic in Arizona.


The state’s teachers were hoping that the Arizona residents would vote “yes” on a November initiative to raise taxes in order to provide more money for education. They gathered enough signatures to place this question before voters. However, the Arizona Supreme Court ruled that signature gatherers misled the public, yanking the “Invest in Ed” initiative from the ballot.


This initiative comes after thousands of teachers spent days protesting at the capitol earlier this year. They staged a walkout in April in an attempt to force legislators and the governor to spend more on education. Unsatisfied with the resulting legislation that provided pay raises for teachers and additional education funding, teaches and activists turned to a ballot initiative to provide dedicated revenue for the state’s schools.


The “Invest in Ed” initiative would have increased taxes and used the resulting revenue specifically for education. For Arizonans making more than $250,000, the initiative would have imposed an 8% income tax (up from the current 4.25% tax). For those making $500,000 or more, the initiative would have imposed a 9% income tax rate. In addition, the initiative would have reset tax rates for Arizonans making incomes under $250,000 while also ending the indexing of tax rates for inflation.


The summary of the initiative used by signature gathers focused on the increased taxes for higher-income Arizonans while leaving out information about how it would affect other taxpayers. The Arizona Chamber of Commerce sued, contending that leaving this information out of the summary misled those who signed petitions to place the initiative on the ballot.


A majority of supreme court justices agreed. They said that this omission could create confusion or unfairness, so these signatures were invalid. The court ordered the initiative removed from the ballot.


This ends the possibility of Arizona voters deciding whether or not to raise taxes to fund education spending this year. Backers of this effort vow to keep up the fight to pressure legislators to increase school spending, however.


Do you think that taxes should be increased to pay for higher school spending?


Virginia Governor Denounces Plan to Arm Teachers


If the school board in a small Virginia county gets its way, teachers and staff members will soon be allowed to carry guns. This does not please Governor Ralph Northam. He has come out against the proposal, urging the attorney general to look into its legality.


Lee County is a rural county in the southwest part of Virginia. Its school board unanimously voted to allow some teachers and staff members to carry concealed weapons or store them in lockers at school. County officials have said that they cannot afford to hire more security for schools, so permitting staff members to carry guns is the only option to provide greater protection to students.


Governor Northam said that arming teachers is not a good idea. He said that school districts should wait for an opinion by the attorney general before undertaking this action. The attorney general’s office is researching the matter, but Attorney General Mark Herring has said that the law bans guns in schools with very few exceptions.


The issue of allowing teachers to carry guns to protect students has been discussed across the country after recent school shootings. Those in favor of the idea think that a teacher with a gun could be the first line of defense if a school shooting occurs. Others say that teachers should not be responsible for confronting armed intruders. Instead, those like Gov. Northam support providing more money for schools to hire security officers.

Do you support allowing teachers and school employees to carry guns to stop school shootings? Or should the government provide more money to schools in order to hire security guards?


Should Arizona Expand Education Savings Accounts?


Arizona legislators want to expand student access to state-funded savings accounts that could be used to pay for private school tuition. A group called Save our Schools Arizona doesn’t like that idea. In November, the state’s voters will decide the future of education choice in the state.


In 2017, Arizona legislators passed a law that Governor Doug Ducey signed that would expand the use of Empowerment Scholarship Accounts (ESAs). These accounts were first established in 2011 for students with disabilities whose parents opt them out of the public school system. The state Department of Education funds ESAs at 90% of the state’s spending for a student in his or her public school district. The money in an ESA can be used for education expenses such as private school tuition or textbooks. Under the 2017 legislation, any Arizona student would be eligible for an ESA.


Save our Schools Arizona collected enough signatures to place this issue on the ballot as a “veto referendum.” This will allow voters to overturn the law if a majority votes “no” in November.


The opponents of expanded ESAs contend that this is nothing more than a way to funnel taxpayer money to private schools. They argue that this will drain funding from public schools that do not have enough money. They also say that it will hurt the state’s efforts to improve education, something that will slow job growth.


Supporters of allowing more students access to ESAs counter that this is simply giving parents more control over the money being spent to educate their children. They say that parents, not bureaucrats, can better manage the money so that their children receive a better education. They also note that the opposition to expanding ESAs come from people who want to prop up public schools, no necessarily improve education for individual students.


Do you think that Arizona should provide resources so that parents have more education choices for children? Or are state-funded education savings accounts a way to undermine Arizona public schools?


Gov. Ducey Stands Behind Evolution Education in Arizona


In light of proposed changes to Arizona’s science curriculum standards, Governor Doug Ducey has come out firmly in favor of teaching evolution in the state’s schools. His stance puts him at odds with Superintendent of Public Instruction Diane Douglas. She has proposed weakening the state curriculum’s language regarding evolution, and has expressed her personal support for teaching intelligent design.


The occasion for this disagreement comes as Arizona is looking to revises its existing high school science standards. As part of that, Superintendent Douglas has proposed changing how these standards refer to evolution. For instance, instead of references to “evolution,” the standards would say, “the theory of evolution.” She would also like to replace the use of “evolution” in some areas of the standards with terms like “biological diversity.”


Personally, Superintendent Douglas has also expressed that she thinks that intelligent design should also be taught in public schools. Intelligent design is a theory that an intelligence created and designed the universe, rather than it evolving through natural selection. She points out, however, that this is her own opinion and that none of the state’s science standards refers to or teaches intelligent design.


Asked about the controversy, Governor Ducey said that he believes the state should teach evolution as part of its science curriculum. He notes that creation stories can be taught in other areas, such as in literature courses. The governor has no direct say over school curriculum.


The state science standards will be set after public comments are taken into account.


Do you think that intelligent design should be taught alongside evolution in public schools?


Florida Supreme Court Considering Quality Education Standard


What does it take to provide a “high quality” education? Florida voters, judges, and lawmakers have been wrestling with this issue for years. Soon the state Supreme Court will decide if courts should play a role in deciding how the state constitution’s quality education mandate should be interpreted.


In 1998, Florida voters passed a constitutional amendment that mandated the state provided a “high quality education system.” Advocacy groups and the state have waged a long legal battle to determine what these words mean. Groups suing the state say that the judicial branch should have a role in determining what constitutes a “high quality education system.” The state says that this is an inherently political question, so the courts should stay out of it.


In states like Connecticut and New York, judges have become involved in setting education spending levels in order to meet similar constitutional provisions in other states. Florida advocates want something similar in that state. They say that if there is no authority for the judiciary to mandate ways to comply with that constitutional provision, the education amendment is toothless.


The state pushes back against that argument, noting that there is no agreed-upon standard that will produce the mandated “high quality education system.” The state says that this is an inherently political decision, and that judges should not be setting education policy or determining education spending levels.


Lower courts have agreed with Florida’s arguments in this matter. The state Supreme Court, however, can overturn these lower court decisions and give the judicial branch authority to involve itself in the fight over Florida’s education policy.


Do you think that judges should be able to set education spending levels or determine what constitutes a “high quality” education?


Missouri Legislators Tackle Marriage Age, Abortion, and Charter Schools


The political news in Missouri is dominated by the scandal surrounding Governor Eric Greitens, who is facing a criminal trial and announced Tuesday he would resign effective Friday at 5 p.m. In the face of the media circus surrounding the governor, the work of governing must go on. Legislators recently completed work on a variety of bills for the year. Here are how some of the big issues fared during this year’s Missouri legislative session:


Marriage age: It will no longer be possible for someone under 16 to get married in Missouri. Legislators passed a bill that prohibits marriage under this age and requires anyone who is 16 or 17 to get his or her parents’ permission to get married. Anyone who is over 21 will not be able to marry anyone under 18.


Lieutenant governor appointment: The Senate passed a measure that would allow the governor to appoint a lieutenant governor if there is a vacancy in that office. The Senate would confirm this appointment. The House rejected this proposal, however, leaving unclear the process for filling a vacancy in that office. This issue was highlighted in the legislature because Gov. Greitens could have been removed from office. He has since announced his resignation, and the current lieutenant governor will assume the governorship.


Gas tax: Legislators voted to place a ballot measure before voters in November that would raise the gas tax by 10 cents per gallon. The increase from the current tax rate of 17 cents per gallon to 27 cents per gallon would be phased in through 2022. The proceeds are slated to fund road projects and the highway patrol.


Charter schools: Currently, Missouri only allows charter schools to operate in Kansas, St. Louis, and unaccredited school districts. Legislation to expand charter schools statewide received support from two House committees but never received a vote from the full House.


Abortion: The House passed a bill to ban abortions after 20 weeks. The Senate failed to take this measure up.


Non-discrimination: A House committee passed legislation that would ban discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity in employment, housing, and public accommodations. The full House never considered the bill, however.


Do you think that the marriage age should be set at 16? Should abortions after 20 weeks be banned? Do you support expanding the use of charter schools?


State Employee Pay Raise Hits West Virginia Budget



Teachers in West Virginia Struck for nine days – the longest teaches’ strike in state history – and won a 5% pay increase. Then it was up to legislators to find money in the budget to fund the pay hike for not only teachers but all state employees. They did so, but other areas of the budget felt the hit.


Gov. Justice signed legislation that provided teachers with their 5% pay increase on March 6. Then a few days later legislators passed a state budget that included a 5% pay increase for all state employees. The salary increases cost $111 million. Other items demanded by teachers, such as concessions on health insurance increases, cost an additional $43 million.


To help offset the pay raises for state employees, legislators took the following budget actions:

  • A $46 million increase as requested by Gov. Justice for the Division of Commerce and the Department of Tourism will not be funded
  • $18 million in deferred maintenance projects will not be completed
  • $12 million transfer to the roads fund from the general fund will not happen
  • $13.5 million to shore up the state’s workers’ compensation fund will not be provided


The budget also calls for cuts to the Medicaid program, but it is likely that the governor will find a way to make that money up from elsewhere.


With the governor signing the budget, it puts the pay raise issue to rest for the time being. However, there is concern over whether revenue projects are correct. If revenue is less than anticipated, it will cause problems in the coming fiscal year.


Do you support West Virginia state employees receiving a 5% pay raise? Or do you think that legislators had to cut too much from the state’s other budget priorities to fund this pay hike?



Arizona Key Votes – Education & Kids


Check out these key votes made by elected officials in Arizona earlier this year, and go to to sign up and see how your elected officials voted on these and other issues that impact your daily life.


Senate Bill 1036, Make guidelines for state charter school agency stricter: Passed 30 to 0 in the Senate on February 20 and 35 to 22 in the House on April 17

To add new administrative requirements to the operational guidelines of the State Board for Charter Schools, including new opportunities to challenge rules and regulations and new requirements for responding to rule challenges.


House Bill 2388, Modify state college grant program by easing some requirements and tightening others: Passed 46 to 12 in the House on February 21 and 26 to 0 in the Senate on April 19

To extend the life of a government program that gives state taxpayer subsidies to college students, while modifying certain program qualifications including more stringent GPA and graduation time frame requirements, expanding program eligibility to other fields, and other similar changes.


Senate Bill 1431, Expand school vouchers: Passed 16 to 13 in the Senate and 31 to 28 in the House on April 6

To expand eligibility for the state's Empowerment Scholarship Account program to every student in Arizona by August 2020. However, while any student could apply, the voucher-like program would still only be able to accommodate about 3 percent of the statewide school population.


Senate Bill 1204, Allow public to review high school text books: Passed 21 to 9 in the Senate on February 13

To require school districts to provide an opportunity for public comment for proposed high school textbooks prior to approval.


Senate Bill 1080, Ban young drivers using cell phones: Passed 24 to 6 in the Senate on February 13 and 32 to 24 in the House on April 20

To prohibit instructional permit holders from operating a motor vehicle while using a wireless communication device and prohibit provisional licensees under age 18 from using those devices other than for audible navigation.


Senate Bill 1377, Allow cannabidoil to treat pediatric epilepsy: Passed 29 to 1 in the Senate

To allow any compound, mixture or preparation that contains cannabidiol to be prescribed in the state if federally approved and legalized by the federal FDA & DEA.


Key Virginia Votes on Education


Check out these key votes made by elected officials in Virginia earlier this year, and go to to sign up and see how your elected officials voted on these and other issues that impact your daily life.


Senate Bill 1283, Allow state to establish charter schools: Passed 21 to 19 in the Senate on February 7 and 54 to 43 in the House on February 20

To allow the state Board of Education to establish regional charter schools. Current law gives the power to establish charter schools to local boards of education. In effect, this law would make it easier for charter schools to open in Virginia.


House Bill 1536, Ban grade school suspensions and expulsions: Passed 49 to 47 in the House on February 6 and 33 to 7 on February 13

To prohibit students up to third grade from being suspended for more than five days or expelled except for drug, firearm, and certain other criminal offenses.


House Resolution 431, Encourage college free speech: Passed 64 to 31 in the House on February 22

To encourage public higher education institutions to protect free speech and develop policies that outline how they will deal with public policy controversies.


House Bill 1605, Provide parents with funding for education expenses: Passed 49 to 47 in the House on February 7 and 21 to 19 in the Senate on February 21

To establish an education savings accounts that parents can use to pay for education expenses such as books, tuition, or fees at private schools that do not discriminate by race. The money for these accounts would come from their local school division and be equal to a certain percentage of the per-pupil funding in that district.


House Bill 1578, Allow home schoolers to participate in school sports (the “Tebow Bill”): Passed 60 to 38 in the House on January 24 and 22 to 18 in the Senate on February 13

To allow a home schooled student to participate in interscholastic programs, such as sports, offered by public schools.


Senate Bill 1428, Expand education tax credits for students with disabilities: Passed 23 to 17 in the Senate on February 3 and 61 to 35 in the House on February 7

To remove the requirement that a student with a disability be enrolled in public school to be able to use the education improvement scholarships tax credit. The bill also increases the amount of the tax credit from 100% to 400% of the per-pupil funding amount given by the state to the local school district.


Senate Bill 1242, Establish school choice program: Failed 20 to 20 in the Senate on February 6

To allow parents of a public school students to receive a savings account from their local school district that can be used to pay for a variety of educational expenses, including tuition and fees at a private school. Participating private schools could not discriminate on the basis of race, color, or national origin.


Charter Schools Key Area of Disagreement in Virginia Gubernatorial Race


The direction of Virginia education policy may be decided in a few weeks. The commonwealth’s gubernatorial candidates have very different views on how Virginia’s children should be educated. Republican Ed Gillespie supports giving parents wider options for their children like charter schools, home schooling, and others. Democratic Governor Ralph Northam wants to focus on providing more funding for traditional K-12 education.


Their differences are very stark when it comes to charter schools, which are public schools operating with more freedom than traditional school settings. There is support for charter schools across the political spectrum, with many Democrats joining Republicans in backing them as an alternative to traditional schools. However, Virginia does not have robust charter school programs – it has only eight in existence. Governor Terry McAuliffe has opposed legislation that would give the state power to open charter schools, a move that would curtail the authority of local boards of education to stop these schools from opening.


Proponents of charter schools see them as a way to give children who are struggling in traditional school settings more options to succeed. Opponents contend that charter schools take money away from the school system, giving a few students an advantage at the expense of others.


Lt. Governor Northam is married to a school teacher and is not shy about expressing his skepticism of alternative educational options. When it comes to vouchers for private schools or expanding charter schools, he says, “With regards to charter schools or vouchers, we need to make sure that we fund K-12 first before we move on to other things like charter schools.” He also objects to charter schools for monetary reasons, saying, “the charter proposals seen in Virginia would ultimately divert much-needed funding from school divisions, often those that are in the most need.”


Ed Gillespie takes the opposite view. He embraces charter schools as part of a wider plan to expand educational choice in the commonwealth. On his website, he says, “Through more opportunities, we can improve public schools and provide families greater choices. As governor, I will diversify educational opportunities by strengthening our charter schools, expanding the Education Improvement Scholarship Tax Credit, establishing education savings accounts and promoting policies that are fair to homeschool families — like the Tebow Bill.”


The Republican legislature has passed legislation along the lines of what Gillespie is proposing in his educational platform. If he is elected, it seems likely that many of his ideas would be popular with legislators. If voters return a GOP legislature but give Lt. Governor Northam the governorship, Virginians can expect another four years of stalemate over school choice policy.


Do you support focusing on funding traditional schools over charter schools or vouchers? Or should Virginia expand its charter school network to give children more choices?


Missouri House Bill 2


Check out this key bill voted on by elected officials in Missouri, check-in to the VoteSpotter app to see how your legislators voted, and comment below to share what you think!


Missouri House Bill 2, Appropriations for Education: Passed 119 to 34 in the state House on April 6, 2017.


To spend $6,029,363,067 for various educational expenses.


Comment below to share what you think of Missouri House Bill 2!



Are Sales Tax Holidays Good Policy?


It’s back-to-school season, so that means parents are rushing to stores while clutching school supply lists.  In some states, they may get a brief reprieve from paying sales tax on clothes or notebooks. This type of sales tax holiday may sound like a great deal for consumers, but some experts say it is bad policy.

Sales tax holidays are promoted as a way to spur retail sales as well as help families afford necessary school supplies. Politicians in 16 states have enacted these sales tax holidays, and they cover a variety of goods.


Bob Peterson, a state senator from Ohio, co-sponsored legislation in that state creating a sales tax holiday this year. He says, “Ohioans saved millions of dollars on back-to-school items during the prior Sales Tax Holidays, and stores saw significant boosts in statewide retail sales.”


According to the nonpartisan Tax Foundation, however, these supposed benefits are an illusion. Here are some of the problems with this brief window of tax-free shopping, according to the foundation’s experts:


“Most sales tax holidays involve politicians picking products and industries to favor with exemptions, arbitrarily discriminating among products and across time, and distorting consumer decisions… Political gimmicks like sales tax holidays distract policymakers and taxpayers from genuine, permanent tax relief. If a state must offer a ‘holiday’ from its tax system, it is an implicit recognition that the state’s tax system is uncompetitive. If policymakers want to save money for consumers, then they should cut the sales tax rate year-round.”


What do you think? Do you support sales tax holidays? Or do you think that these holidays are gimmicks that have no real positive effect?


Copyright © 2018 Votespotter Inc. All rights reserved.