Saturday, October 10, 2015
Pa. House rejects Wolf budget plan
The House has voted down Wolf's budget plan to increase funding for schools through an income tax increase and a new tax on natural gas drillers. This means that Pennsylvania is currently without a budget, which halts aid to schools, counties, and nonprofits. Wolf is a Democrat and was defeated by the Republican majority as well as nine Democrats. What is your opinion on Wolf's budget plan? What type (or types) of politics are evident during the budget debate?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I think Wolf's budget plan has good intentions, yet there might potentially be other ways to get more money for schools, counties, and nonprofit organizations. It seems like states keep needing more and more money as the years progress as our textbook mentions. The federal and state spending of 50 years ago is MUCH different (and less) than what it is now. Perhaps there is room to shift money around in the budget and reallocate funds to the appropriate, needed areas. Maybe raising taxes is the only way... It's hard to tell because we don't know all of the logistics.
ReplyDeleteThe idea of bipartisanship seems to make the most sense in attempting to resolve the issue. The Democrats and Republicans show their usual behavior of not cooperating to pass bills. It seems that both sides have their beliefs and (sometimes) the interests of the people at heart, especially the Democrat who voted against the bill because it would affect the natural gas industry and the jobs provided in his district.
I understand why people voted this way, but although no one wants higher taxes, something has got to give when the state needs more money. Unless we can significantly rearrange our budget and eliminate any "unnecessary" costs like Rachel mentions, the money needs to come from somewhere. Perhaps Wolf could have asked for slightly lower taxes, but I agree that something needs to be done. We need to get a policy in place and end the stalemate. Wolf already tried to compromise by reducing state sales tax from his original plan; the Republicans should be willing to meet him halfway. If they cannot come up with a better policy, I believe that some policy is better than nothing.
ReplyDeleteThis could be considered majoritarian and entrepreneurial politics. Assuming that most kids and young adults attend school and the parents will benefit in the long run from money brought in by educated children, the large, unorganized majority of citizens will benefit directly or indirectly from an increase in school funding. The income tax increase will affect the overwhelming majority adults (majoritarian), but an identifiable group of natural gas drillers will also have to pay greater taxes (entrepreneurial) for the good of the group.
In my opinion, I believe that Wolf's budget plan was a good idea to be able to fund more schools, but there are other ways to complete the same task without going to such a high extent in raising taxes. Essentially, his intentions for raising income taxes and taxes on natural gas drillers was a good idea, but in the end, he was doing too much. The budget plan did not get passed, and it seems like he was doing it all for the right reasons but the concept of raising taxes was just not the way to do it, in my opinion. The governement is always needing money, and if raising certain taxes is their solution, then eventually people would just become impoverished. I would like to think there would be other ways to raise more money to fund schools but I don't really know of a change that would make a big impact. So in a sense, I believe that Wolf's budget plan would be appropriate, but there are consequences of the higher taxes to go along with the good, which is funding schools.
ReplyDeleteThis could be considered a bipartisanship since the two political parties, Democratic and Republican are both opposing this budget plan and are refusing to pass such bills. I think both the Democrats and Republicans have their beliefs but in the end, the people are what they are worried about the most. The bill did not get passed because of the consequences going along with raising taxes to such an extent. There is also some majoritarian politics integrated into this article, because of how these decisions affected the majority with the increase in income taxes. A certain majority will benefit from the increase of school funding, but there is also a majority who will suffer.
Personally, I believe that Wolf was correct in attempting to create more funding for schools, as there are many areas just around us where more funding would be a great help. However, in my opinion, by standing tall for the proposed plan and budging very little while Pennsylvania doesn't currently have a budget, he is doing the state a disservice. I think that the route to go would be to start finding other more palatable ways to find funding, or start reducing the proposed increases. This is going to be necessary if Wolf wants a budget he has written to pass, because otherwise he will just be overridden by bipartisan support for another proposed budget (at least, I genuinely hope so, because I hope that they will see the necessity to act quickly to get at least something passed). Also, no matter how many times I see it, I think it is shocking to watch just how rigid party lines are being clung to currently. As many times as I've heard about it, seen the statistics, it's still startling to see in action. Maybe this will spark some sort of bipartisan work that will get the ball rolling for the future, in a best case scenario. However, something must be done and quickly, or else we will find ourselves in a very bad scenario, with no budget being passed and no aid being given to schools or counties because of it.
ReplyDeleteI view the proposed budget as majoritarian politics, because I tend to view things with the family being a unit, largely because children don't really count when it comes to accounting for costs when it comes to tax dollars. Therefore, it will be a widely distributed cost, because every family would pay for the new funding, but also the majority of families would then benefit from the new funding too, through their children getting a better education, leading to, eventually, a better job with higher income. However, I also think that it is partly entrepreneurial politics, as the natural gas companies would be paying new taxes, which is a small percentage of the population, and the workers themselves would be doubly taxed through the income tax, which creates a group of people paying more for the raise in funding for education throughout the state. Therefore, I think that Wolf's plan was both majoritarian and entrepreneurial.
I completely understand people not wanting higher/more taxes. However, the tax money wouldn't be going to something that people don't want or that is not useful. It's going towards education. I often hear reports on how low our schools are internationally on both testing and happiness. So, surely some money towards education could not only help raise our standards to a more internationally accepted level but also make education better and make it reach more children and teenagers around the US.
ReplyDeleteThe income tax for education would be a majoritarian policy as everyone would pay the cost (money) and all would benefit (better education). The tax on natural gas drilling would be entrepreneurial as a group (gas drillers) will pay more for the benefit of all.
Personally, I am glad that his budget plan failed. Taxes are already too high. I understand they would benefit everyone (except private school attendees and people who are home schooled ) which is a logical place for the money to go, but it's not worth raising the taxes even higher. Existing taxes have increased and new taxes have sprung up since the begining of the U.S. For example, income tax did not exist until Lincoln implemented it during the civil war. And when he did implement it, it was originally 4% and now it's 25-28% for most people. That's rediculous. The revolution was fought to end excessive taxes. If anything we need to reduce state and federal spending by a large amount, not raise taxes so we can spend more.
ReplyDeleteI think Wolf had good intentions when he wanted to increase the funding for schools, but I understand why people wouldn't want to pay higher taxes to make the new budget possible. I also understand why people are against taxing the natural gas drillers since they provide many jobs to people. I think they need to find a way to compromise soon, or the budget problem will never really be resolved. Increasing income tax to pay for education would be majoritarian politics because everyone pays and many people would benefit from better education. Taxing the natural gas drillers would be entrepreneurial politics because the natural gas companies would pay taxes and everyone else in the state would benefit.
ReplyDeleteI think Wolf had good intentions when he wanted to increase the funding for schools, but I understand why people wouldn't want to pay higher taxes to make the new budget possible. I also understand why people are against taxing the natural gas drillers since they provide many jobs to people. I think they need to find a way to compromise soon, or the budget problem will never really be resolved. Increasing income tax to pay for education would be majoritarian politics because everyone pays and many people would benefit from better education. Taxing the natural gas drillers would be entrepreneurial politics because the natural gas companies would pay taxes and everyone else in the state would benefit.
ReplyDeleteI completely understand that people would not want to have their taxes raised, but when schools don't have budgets, something needs to be done. A budget for education is of utmost importance. Our generation will suffer without increased funding, ultimately affecting all future generations. One Republican said Wolf's plan is "disconnected from the taxpayers," but if schools are given increased funding, it will benefit everyone in the long run: with a better education, kids will go on to become more successful. The two parties need to reach a compromise of some sort--whether it's increasing taxes but not as much as Wolf proposed or reducing the budget elsewhere--or the problem will never be solved.
ReplyDeleteMajoritarian politics can be seen in the proposed tax increase, as it would affect many adults in the state and also positively affect education, something which affects everyone. Entrepreneurial politics can be seen in the proposed tax on the natural gas drilling, as a small group would pay and a large group would benefit.
I think Wolf's proposal was a good one and if I was voting I would have voted for this proposal. The proposal to me just makes sense. There has to be sacrifices if we want good to come for our state. The only downside to this plan is the tax increases but for people to benefit other people must sacrifice. In this situation the sacrifice is more tax payer dollars. Part of the proposal was to use the money for school districts. The Philadelphia school district could definitely use this money because they have been suffering for years now. Also Rep. Rick Saccone is wrong for calling Wolf's proposal a "a cheap magician's trick." It is a reasonable plan to fix a problem.
ReplyDeleteIt's a good idea to increase funding for education, because it is a very important part of our lives. However, I disagree with the methods Wolf is using to get funds for education. No one really wants higher taxes, and the article mentioned that "natural gas prices are at an all-time low", so they definitely shouldn't have an even higher tax imposed on them right now. Wolf should try to find other ways to provide funding for PA schools, and also try to compromise his plan to appeal more to the Republicans because it is clearly not going to work the way it is right now. This is an example of majoritarian politics because the benefits are widely distributed too all students in Pennsylvania, and the costs are distributed to almost everyone, since most people are affected by sales tax and income tax. However, the budget plan is partially entrepreneurial politics since the tax on natural gas drilling counts as a concentrated cost.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Wolf's plan for an increased budget for schools. There are many struggling Pennsylvanian school districts the state needs to do something about that. Wolf might have to be more willing to work with the Republicans of the house so that this issue is resolved soon and our state has a budget. Not having a budget is only hurting the schools he wants to help. The plan for the tax increase for schools would be majoritarian politics because it could be seen as a disadvantage for people having to pay more taxes but its for a good cause. The plan for the natural gas drilling will cost them but be better for everyone else so it would be entrepreneurial.
ReplyDeleteI've been raised in a time where bipartisanship seems more like a fantasy than anything realistic and obtainable. We all want our way. If we could, we would take everything we wanted without giving anything up. But that's not how real life works. It's difficult, politics these days seems to be a line of hostages, from the voters, to the most powerful politicians. Voters hold their representatives hostage with their votes. Time and time again, politician's constituents have quickly thrown their representatives out into the cold. In some states even going so far as to hold a recall election. Politicians are afraid of losing their seats and their power. Politicians themselves are holding their constituents hostage. In the case of no budget being passed, children are suffering. We students are being thrown around like bargaining chips. Politicians are holding their leadership hostage. Like the case of John Boehner, Republican and Democratic leadership are too afraid of being turned on to offer any meaningful compromise. So, in the midst of this Mexican standoff, nothing is getting done.
ReplyDeleteMoney needs to be raised. That much is clear. But that needs to be done through a series of talks and compromises in which one party gives up something in exchange for the other party giving up something else. It's simple in theory, but obviously quite difficult in practice.
I completely agree with Tanner's point of bipartisan legislation being almost impossible. This is especially true in the current situation of the Pennsylvania Senate with a strong majority on the Republican side with a Democratic governor. Both sides need to give up one of their parties respective principles in order for a budget to be passed in one of the more politically diverse states.
ReplyDeleteIt is also interesting how many of the basic ideals of this budget are also the ideals that Wolf pushed upon the people while he was running for office. The majority of his political advertisements were about funding education at the expense of the oil and natural gas companies. It was not feasible to disagree with these ideals and not vote for Tom Wolf. 55% of the state voted for Wolf in the general election, including the majority of Delaware County, a traditionally political safe haven for Republican candidates.
I think Wolf had good intentions in trying to obtain funds for the budget to benefit public schools, however I also understand where people are coming from in not wanting to pay higher taxes. Either way you look at it someone is going to be unhappy in trying to achieve this budget, but besides the fact a compromise needs to be achieved sooner rather than later. All forms of education are important and people need to put aside their differences concerning where the money is coming from and realize that in the end the lack of decision making is effecting kids ability to learn.
ReplyDeleteI think Wolf was right on target with his budget plan. We live in a state in which education levels in inner city communities are at an astonishingly low level. On top of that, we are the only state that doesn't tax companies who drill for natural gas. While some might argue that not taxing these businesses brings more of them into our state (and ultimately more money), this does by no means outweighs our need for an educated society; not to mention the highly consequential impact this decision has on the environment. I hope that Wolf will continue to push for this plan, as I believe it is the method that makes the most sense for Pennsylvania in its current state.
ReplyDeleteThere are many schools in Pennsylvania that are in dire need of extra money, so yes, I can get behind wanting to raise funds in our schools. The two parties need to set their differences aside and come up with a compromise.
ReplyDelete