Login

Register | Forgot Your Password? | Close

I voted yes on Proposition 100, but I'd be lying if I said I feel good about it.

It's not that I don't think the state can use the money; no, I'm sure it can. I understand that without this added revenue there will be cuts in many areas of the budget, affecting services and education. I get that.

I'm also a person who is very much willing to pay more in taxes if I believe the money will benefit us all - I'm not selfish enough to sit here and say, "I have no kids, why worry about education?"

But does anyone really think this extra revenue is going to help the children get a better education? Even when the economy was good, we were one of the worst states in the union when it came to funding education. Why now, when we are in a difficult recession, are we finally deciding to focus on that area of the budget?

Picture this: There is an organization that is important to society and the economy, yet you rarely hear from it about any issue. Suddenly the economy tanks and with it goes the organization. Of course, this cannot happen, as this organization struggling is bad for the rest of us. So, the government steps in and gives them money to prop them up, making sure the organization stays afloat on our dime. Don't you hate those bailouts?

The problem is somehow, some way, we got to this point. Money was wasted like no other in a horrible business model, and that won't change just by throwing more cash at the problem. Sure, this tax may help over the next three years, but the very same reasons why they are in this predicament will remain unless significant changes are made. Does Proposition 100 just act as a band-aid, delaying the inevitable crash that IS NEEDED in order to finally restructure things in a way that benefits us all?

With my yes vote, though, I do have a few requests:

Please don't waste any more money. I'm looking at you, Governor Brewer, and the ridiculous decision to file a frivolous lawsuit against the president's health care plan. Never mind the fact that it won't win - even if it did succeed, all it takes is ONE STATE to win the lawsuit and the results will apply to everyone in the Union. But, in your infinite wisdom, it was a good decision to spend the money it will cost to file the lawsuit (and don't tell me it won't cost taxpayers a thing; we all know it will). You can't reasonably continue to cry to us about a deficit and then decide to play politics with our money.

Speaking of politics, our government can not complain about a lack of revenue and then pass legislation (right or wrong) that brings on such a backlash that the state is still losing money because of the decision. Don't get me wrong, the move by these other cities to boycott Arizona is purely political as well, and it is really a shortsighted idea. But if our legislature, and governor, didn't at least predict this may happen, then they need to look in the mirror and us at other candidates in November.

Most of all, fix the system. Hopefully this tax (if it passes) buys you a window to make the necessary changes to make things better for the long run, because if you're asking me to approve another tax in 2013 then you can rest assured you will have at least one fewer vote.

7 Comments   |   Join the conversation »
  • Add A Comment 
  • Abuse
    patriot 1776 wrote...
    Big Mistake
    In 3 years when this tax is supposedly going to expire, there will no doubt be another crisis that will cause the powers that be to extend to and/or add to this tax indefinitely. All you "Yes" voters just gave a wink and a nod to inept budgetary practices. Way to go.
  • Abuse
    Peter L. wrote...
    Prop 100
    All you yes voters just gave a bunch of politicians more money to mis-spend. Hope that for our next election for our representatives, we can elect people who now how to balance a budget and spend our money rather than electing a bunch of "talkers".
  • Abuse
    Paddy B wrote...
    1% more, please...
    The reasons you voted for the increase are the precise reasons I voted against the increase. I'm surprised so many people fell for the scare tactic of education cuts. "It's for the children..." they tell us. Well, maybe the State can provide me with a new Dodge Challenger and a vacation in Vegas. "It'll be for the children..."
  • Abuse
    fanoftheconstitution wrote...
    No kidding!
    I was talking with one of my employees, and I asked her, "Do you WANT to pay more sales tax." She says, "No". I said, "So why did you vote yes?" She says, "well, the kids would end up on the streets, and the teachers would be out of a job!" All I could say to that was "You got duped". One of these days we will stop falling for "it's for the children..." (word for word conversation)
  • Abuse
    fanoftheconstitution wrote...
    Mistake
    You stated that since you voted yes you would like to see the state not waste money (ie on lawsuits against the health care bill). That is exactly why you should have voted NO. I voted no because until the state can prove to me that they can responsibly handle monies, and I mean REALLY handle the money responsibly- they wont get me to vote in a tax increase.
  • Abuse
    Bob Q. wrote...
    Title should be
    "A reluctant idiot" Mr. Green, you've got everything wrong; but take heart: politicians, unions, and the education elites count on people like you, and with your yes vote, you've performed exactly as they expected. Mindless sheep.
  • Abuse
    Mr Ted wrote...
    Rob Peter to Pay Paul
    Gov. Brewer increases sales tax 1% to fund education. Arizona ranks 34 out of 38 states surveyed for the amount spent per child by the state. In addition to the 1% the state no wants to raid voter protected funding from first things first ($300 mil) to put into the general fund. So we sweep funds from education and then add a tax to fund education, when FTF offered to lend the state their funds interest free! But the state does not want to have to pay it back, easier to take it. We got robbed twice and it will probably not end up in schools either way.
close

Share: