Educators across the Commonwealth say voters showed their commitment to public education in the midterm election by passing the Fair Share Amendment.
It creates a 4% tax on annual incomes above $1 million to help pay for public education and transportation.
It's expected to generate at least $2 billion in revenue for schools, universities and vocational training, as well as the roads and trains to help get the students there.
Joanna Gonsalves - associate professor at Salem State University and member of the Massachusetts State College Association - said the new funding is no 'magic bullet,' but a start to addressing system failures in the state.
"I think we need to start to address some of the crumbling infrastructure in our public campuses and the buildings, in our roads and in MBTA," said Gonsalves. "And that's going to require some additional funding, beyond Fair Share."
Many business groups opposed the Fair Share Amendment, warning it would make the Commonwealth less economically competitive and drive away employers. They also question the need for more revenue when the state is already running a large budget surplus.
The decision about where the new tax revenue is spent ultimately rests with state lawmakers, and even future lawmakers are under no obligation to spend the money as requested.
Still, Gonsalves said lawmakers would be wise to respond to the public's concerns about the cost of higher education in Massachusetts and the wellbeing of its students.
"We need to address the most basic things, like class size," said Gonsalves. "We want to make sure we have enough staff and services for our students."
That includes the great need for increased mental-health services as schools continue to recover from the impact of the pandemic. And Massachusetts faces a critical shortage of school counselors, with one counselor for every 364 students.
get more stories like this via email
Like others across the country, many Missouri families struggle with the cost of child care, and state lawmakers are proposing some relief.
Rep. Hannah Kelly, R-Mountain Grove, serves Webster County, where the average child care cost for a family with two young children is more than $12,000 a year a year. Kelly has introduced legislation to create a state child care tax credit for parents who qualify for the federal child care tax credit. As with the federal credit, it requires having earned income.
Kelly pointed out no one who's paying attention to "everyday reality" can miss the fact young families are struggling.
"Nobody wants to give a handout, we only want to invest and give a hand up," Kelly stated. "This is money that people have earned, and we're putting it back in their pocket, once we can verify that they're making responsible choices, for their family and for their businesses."
Under House Bill 1335, individuals earning up to $75,000 a year and couples earning up to $150,000 would be eligible for a tax credit toward their child care expenses. The amount would be $1,800 for children up to age two, and $1,200 for kids ages three to six, for a maximum of two children per family.
Kelly added the credit is nontransferable and nonrefundable, features which can make tax credits more expensive. She explained her bill allows parents to choose their child care provider, who does not have to be licensed, but it does include limitations.
"You cannot have your spouse qualify as a day care provider," Kelly noted. "You can't have an older child qualify. It's all very tightly run; it's all very accountable."
Kelly stressed she supports the governor's child care tax credits included in House Bill 870, sponsored by Rep. Brenda Shields, R-St. Joseph.
The credits in Shields' bill would go to child care providers, corporations subsidizing their workers' child care expenses, and donors to child care centers, whereas the credits in Kelly's bill would go directly to families. Kelly feels combining the tax credits in both bills would benefit people "in every corner of the state."
get more stories like this via email
The Iowa Legislature's powerful Ways and Means Committee has advanced a measure to eliminate the state income tax. The move is the latest in a series of votes to reduce taxes in Iowa.
Senate Study Bill 1126 would lower Iowa's income-tax rate to flat 2.5% in five years.
Then in 2030, the income tax would be eliminated completely. This comes just after Iowa passed a 3.9% flat tax last year.
Executive Director of nonprofit, nonpartisan Common Good Iowa Anne Discher said - given that the state income tax accounts for 50% of the Iowa's budget - eliminating it would decimate crucial public services.
"State aid to public schools is 43% of our state budget," said Discher. "We could entirely eliminate state aid for our entire public school system and it wouldn't be enough to cover the kind of income tax cuts that we're talking about. So, the kinds of service cuts really would be draconian."
Republicans have said this bill, and the flat tax signed into law last year, are designed to give Iowans broad tax relief and also make the state attractive to businesses that may be considering locating in Iowa.
Discher pointed out that Iowa is already facing a revenue shortfall due to last year's tax cut.
She added that eliminating the income tax revenue would affect mental health, safety and other social service programs in Iowa. But she warned that it could have other consequences, too.
"It is certainly a shot across the bow against racial equity, as well," said Discher. "We are further advantaging the wealthiest Iowans - further advantaging, as a group, white Iowans. Iowans of color are over-represented at the lower end of the income distribution, because of longstanding discrimination in housing, education and employment."
The bill moves next to the full Senate.
get more stories like this via email
Critics of a proposed pay raise for state workers said it barely keeps up with inflation and is not enough to alleviate Kentucky's long-standing government workforce crisis.
House Bill 444 would use $89 million for a 6% raise, despite having $200 million already set aside.
Dustin Pugel, executive director of the Kentucky Center for Economic Policy, explained over the past two decades, the state's public workforce has shrunk, despite a growing population and increasing demand for public services.
"We've heard the last couple of sessions, horror stories really from people and child welfare and public defenders about how their caseloads have ballooned," Pugel reported. "That just creates a vicious cycle; when people are overworked and underpaid, they leave."
Last year the General Assembly passed an 8% across the board increase for state workers, and funneled extra cash to social workers, family support staff, public defenders, and the state police. Pugel pointed out while any raise is better than none, the legislation would still leave state workers making far less in inflation-adjusted dollars than they were in 2011.
Nationwide, pay increases for state and local government employees haven't kept pace with inflation or those of private workers, according to an analysis by the Pew Research Center.
Pugel noted a few years ago, when residents called local agencies for assistance with SNAP benefits, Medicaid, or unemployment insurance benefits, they spent hours waiting on the phone.
"Even now, when you call the department for community based services, you're likely to be on hold for 20, 30, 40 minutes before someone picks up the phone," Pugel observed. "About a third of folks who call in just end up hanging up before anyone helps them."
According to the Kentucky Center for Economic Policy, even with last year's raise, state government vacancies remain high.
Disclosure: The Kentucky Center for Economic Policy contributes to our fund for reporting on Budget Policy and Priorities, Criminal Justice, Education, and Hunger/Food/Nutrition. If you would like to help support news in the public interest,
click here.
get more stories like this via email