Endorsement: Yes on Prop 30

The debate between Propositions 30 and 38 is intensifying for California residents. Unfortunately, neither proposition is perfect. Prop. 30, Gov. Jerry Brown’s measure, plans to increase taxes on the richest Californians to help close the budget gap, generating revenue for schools and local public safety programs. Prop. 38, lawyer Molly Munger’s proposal, would raise the income tax rate on most Californians to help fund schools and pay down the state’s hefty education bond debt.

Both are far from the long-term care California’s systematically flawed school system and budget desperately need. But Prop. 38’s singular focus on K-12 education and use of a sliding scale to raise taxes for those earning as little as $7,316 per year is not the answer to California’s budget woes. Meanwhile, Prop. 30 is the only proposal that will prevent a $6 billion trigger cut to schools at all levels that have already been facing enormous budgetary problems for years. For these reasons, the Daily Trojan urges the Trojan Family to vote yes on Prop. 30 and no on Prop. 38.

With solid relief for public safety programs and schools alike, Prop. 30 is effectively the stronger option. Its funds would primarily come from increasing the income tax by 1 to 3 percentage points over seven years only on individuals who earn more than $250,000. The rest would come from increasing the state sales tax by a quarter of a cent for the next four years — a minor burden that would yield major benefits for the state, and one that would save K-12 schools from canceling up to three weeks’ worth of classes, UC students from paying mid-year tuition hikes, all state universities from slashing classes and state programs ranging from fire safety to substance abuse treatment from being reduced.

Some argue that voting for both propositions is the best route voters can take to ensure some sort of relief for California education. But before going to the polls or sending in their absentee ballots, voters should understand the implications of doing so.

A vote for Prop. 38 is a vote against Prop. 30 becoming law — something numerous experts and publications, including the Los Angeles Times, have pointed out. Prop. 38 also does nothing to stop the deep budget cuts for California’s university systems that Prop. 30 would prevent.

But support for Prop. 30 has plunged to only 46 percent of registered voters, down from 64 percent in March, according to the most recent USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times poll released on Oct. 25. Another 42 percent of voters opposed the measure outright. A majority — 61 percent — of those polled, however, were over the age of 45, and other recent polls suggest young voter turnout could be a critical factor in Prop. 30’s passage or defeat. A Public Policy Institute of California poll released on Oct. 24 found that 70 percent of voters age 18 to 34 support Prop 30. The difference between the successful passing of Prop. 30 and a future of crippling budget cuts lies in whether these voters turn out come election day.

Californians deserve education that isn’t burdened by shortened terms or budget cuts. Prop. 30 presents a clear path to ensuring that students do not lose out. Though Prop. 38 is well-intended, Prop. 30 offers the kind of broad financial relief California’s public schools need now.

USC students might not be directly impacted by Prop. 30’s passage or failure, but our university will be. Every year, USC accepts an increasing number of community college and state university students, all of whom face the burden of budget cuts to schools.

With our peers’ educations on the line, it’s clear that we must vote yes on 30 — a measure that will help steer California’s future in the right direction.

Staff editorials are determined by the editorial board. Its members are Elena Kadvany, Nicholas Slayton, Jennifer Schultz, Eddie Kim, Joey Kaufman and Sean Fitz-Gerald.


9 replies
  1. Lou
    Lou says:

    “USC students might not be directly impacted by Prop. 30’s passage or failure”

    Unless USC students never buy anything ever again, they will all be affected by Prop 30.

  2. Remus
    Remus says:

    1. It must be easy to endorse this for you as long as you don’t have to pay it. It’s always easy to spend other people’s money, especially if they’re well off. After all, they’re all just greedy, right? No. They have earned their money. They can do what they want with it.
    2. Cut the frivolous spending. That’s how this state got into trouble in the first place. And I earned my money through hard work. I didn’t earn it just to give it right back to people that control their spending.
    3. Of course older people oppose 30. It’s a stopgap solution that only really affects them, and not in a good way.

    • Paul
      Paul says:

      Figures a bunch of college kids with nothing majors would just willy nilly want a tax on those who have worked hard for a great income. They’ll never see that figure annually.

Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. […] But the best part of the supplement to me is the DT‘s endorsement of Proposition 30. If you haven’t voted yet, if you’ve already decided, whatever — give it a read. Prop. 30 isn’t perfect, but it’s the better of two options (versus the challenger Proposition 38). Check it out here: Yes on Prop 30 […]

Comments are closed.