Unaffordable tax cut
Published: Monday, June 24, 2013, 9:00 p.m.
Time is running out for students across Pennsylvania. Little time remains for state lawmakers to begin to undo the damage they have done with deep funding cuts to schools. A House budget plan leaves nearly 85 percent of those cuts in place, doing little to hire back nurses and counselors or to restore music, arts and sports programs that districts have been forced to cut.
Senate leaders and Gov. Corbett's administration have signaled willingness to delay a business tax cut next year. That is welcome news.
Keeping the tax rate at 2012 levels could raise $360 million to restore some of the deepest school cuts. Sen. Jake Corman asks critics: “Is that (tax) phaseout more important than education dollars?”
Schools have been forced to absorb state funding cuts, but students in the poorest districts have gotten the worst of it. Students with the greatest challenges should not be asked to sacrifice more to pay for new tax cuts for profitable corporations.
Delaying an unaffordable business tax cut is the fiscally responsible thing to do and the best way to restore critical educational opportunities for our children.
Lawrence A. Feinberg
The writer, a member of the Haverford Township School Board in Delaware County, is co-chairman of the Keystone State Education Coalition (keystonestateeducationcoalition.blogspot.com).
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Prevailing wage downsides I
- Prevailing wage downsides II
- Hero at rest
- Eagles’ plight
- Nukes, not hoops
- Double standard?
- Lies and disrespect I taught …
- Fuel tax increase
- Us & them
- Zubik is right
- Prevailing wage misunderstood