by Mona Field, Social Sciences Division
As
of deadline (April 8), the news from Sacramento about our state budget
situation is limited. The last word was that the state faces a
$17.5 billion (yes, billion!) gap between projected revenues and planned
expenditures for the fiscal year that begins July 1, 2002.
This shortfall is due to a drastic loss of tax revenues based on the
drop in the economy, both before and after 9/11/01.The months prior to
September involved a slowing in the dot.com sector as well as the hard
hits taken by some regions of the state when the "energy
crisis" hit in spring 2001. After 9/11, we all know how tourism and
other sources of revenue plummeted.
As always, when the economy catches a cold, the government gets
pneumonia. And no one is predicting that the "May revise"
will bring any better news—the patient (California) is definitely in
the ICU.
For us at GCC, this means cutbacks. Although
we lobby hard for our share of what's there, you can't spend what
doesn't exist. The internal decisions about what and how to cut have
begun, and the brown bag lunches sponsored by the district have kept
interested employees informed. The two unions are working hard to
protect their members as much as possible, and everyone at GCC shares
the concern about how cuts will affect our students.
SOLUTIONS? CAN THERE BE ANY?
Our union, the California Federation of Teachers, is on record as favoring
structured tax increases rather than further cuts in education and
public services. Some of the ways the state can bridge the gap include:
¾ Reassessing
business property: When publicly traded corporations change more than half their ownership via
stock purchases, their property should be reassessed at current market
value. (Current practice under Prop. 13 leaves business properties at
their 1976 levels forever—or until the corporation admits that it is
defunct, a rare occurrence.)
¾ Raising
income tax for top brackets: for individual returns over $260,000 and joint returns over $520,000.
¾ Enacting
severance tax on oil produced in California.
¾ Conforming
state tax law to federal tax laws.
¾ Limiting
deductions for mortgage interest to $50,000.
These tax changes could prevent the cutbacks in public education and other
vital services. However, in an election year, it will be hard to get
politicians to talk about raising taxes—even on corporations and the
wealthy, which is the CFT's approach.
So, barring a miracle, we should prepare to tighten our belts, both as
employees and as public servants. Almost without question, our
students will lose more than we will. Let us hope that the damage
is minimal and short-lived.
Anyone ready to send those letters to insist on some tax increases? &
|