NE1: Education Tax Credit and Rebate Act (Failed)

[Deus Naturae]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor: Representative Deus

Debate on this bill will last for 72 hours, or until 5:05 PM on Friday May 9, unless modified or extended. The sponsor has 36 hours to advocate for this proposed legislation. If he does not, this bill will be tabled as there is other pending legislation in the queue.

[Deus Naturae]

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The purpose of this legislation is to provide tax relief for families that must incur expenses in order to pay for their cild's education. The first part of the bill provides a simple income tax credit for educational expenses. The would allow families to pay for their child's/children's education with no impact on their finances other than that which they would already have to deal with as a result of the Regional income tax. Initially, this was going to be the entire bill, but then I realized that families that pay no income tax (those which have no income earner who earns $50,000 or more) and need this relief the most would not be able to benefit from this credit. So, I added the second part of the bill, which grants various tax rebates to income non-taxpayers, equal to their educational expenses. The reason I included rebates for all non-income taxes was so that income non-taxpayers could have the greatest possible chance of being able to take full advantage of the rebate(s).

Also, I realize that there is a revenue issue involved here. I would like to ask for a GM analysis of the impact this bill would have on Regional revenues as soon as a new Gm is appointed.

[Napoleon]

Nice new name, but I won't be supporting school vouchers.

[Deus Naturae]

Nice new name, but I won't be supporting school vouchers.

In what way is this bill equivalent to a school voucher program?

[Napoleon]

Nice new name, but I won't be supporting school vouchers.

In what way is this bill equivalent to a school voucher program?

Offering tax credits to pay for education. Obviously the Northeast offers every student a free education. If that isn't good enough, they ought to pay more.

[Deus Naturae]

Nice new name, but I won't be supporting school vouchers.

In what way is this bill equivalent to a school voucher program?

Offering tax credits to pay for education. Obviously the Northeast offers every student a free education. If that isn't good enough, they ought to pay more.

The tax credits in this bill wouldn't be exclusive to privately or home schooled students. They could also be used to help pay for the cost of school supplies, transit costs for traveling to school, and other things that are just as necessary for public school students as they are for private/home school students.

Nothing is free. The public education system is paid for - through taxes. This bill would simply allow parents to derive direct educational benefit for their children from their tax monies. It would ensure fairness towards parents who prefer to educate their children in other ways.

[Napoleon]

Nice new name, but I won't be supporting school vouchers.

In what way is this bill equivalent to a school voucher program?

Offering tax credits to pay for education. Obviously the Northeast offers every student a free education. If that isn't good enough, they ought to pay more.

The tax credits in this bill wouldn't be exclusive to privately or home schooled students. They could also be used to help pay for the cost of school supplies, transit costs for traveling to school, and other things that are just as necessary for public school students as they are for private/home school students.

Nothing is free. The public education system is paid for - through taxes. This bill would simply allow parents to derive direct educational benefit for their children from their tax monies. It would ensure fairness towards parents who prefer to educate their children in other ways.

And if they want their kids educated in "other ways", they can pay for it without a tax credit. And the other things you mention are typical red herrings- this is a school voucher bill plain and simple. Theres really no reason to give tax credits for $100 worth of school supplies or whatever and doing such would only encourage the waste that's already rampant when it comes to paper, etc.

[Deus Naturae]

Nice new name, but I won't be supporting school vouchers.

In what way is this bill equivalent to a school voucher program?

Offering tax credits to pay for education. Obviously the Northeast offers every student a free education. If that isn't good enough, they ought to pay more.

The tax credits in this bill wouldn't be exclusive to privately or home schooled students. They could also be used to help pay for the cost of school supplies, transit costs for traveling to school, and other things that are just as necessary for public school students as they are for private/home school students.

Nothing is free. The public education system is paid for - through taxes. This bill would simply allow parents to derive direct educational benefit for their children from their tax monies. It would ensure fairness towards parents who prefer to educate their children in other ways.

And if they want their kids educated in "other ways", they can pay for it without a tax credit. And the other things you mention are typical red herrings- this is a school voucher bill plain and simple. Theres really no reason to give tax credits for $100 worth of school supplies or whatever and doing such would only encourage the waste that's already rampant when it comes to paper, etc.

Why should they shouldn't they be able to use their own tax dollars to pay for their own child's education? The purpose of the public education system is to educate children. If parents can educate their children in other ways, using their own money, why shouldn't they be able to?

[Napoleon]

Nice new name, but I won't be supporting school vouchers.

In what way is this bill equivalent to a school voucher program?

Offering tax credits to pay for education. Obviously the Northeast offers every student a free education. If that isn't good enough, they ought to pay more.

The tax credits in this bill wouldn't be exclusive to privately or home schooled students. They could also be used to help pay for the cost of school supplies, transit costs for traveling to school, and other things that are just as necessary for public school students as they are for private/home school students.

Nothing is free. The public education system is paid for - through taxes. This bill would simply allow parents to derive direct educational benefit for their children from their tax monies. It would ensure fairness towards parents who prefer to educate their children in other ways.

And if they want their kids educated in "other ways", they can pay for it without a tax credit. And the other things you mention are typical red herrings- this is a school voucher bill plain and simple. Theres really no reason to give tax credits for $100 worth of school supplies or whatever and doing such would only encourage the waste that's already rampant when it comes to paper, etc.

Why should they shouldn't they be able to use their own tax dollars to pay for their own child's education? The purpose of the public education system is to educate children. If parents can educate their children in other ways, using their own money, why shouldn't they be able to?

The tax dollars are to pay for the public education system. Its that simple. Under your logic we should just give everyone who doesn't have children $5000 as well. I'm not terribly interested in reducing funds for the public school system so that those funds are redirected to lily white prep schools and nutty religious institutions. We only just got rid of our wacky education experiment so I would like to see some sanity in the region at least for a while. I was happy to give private schools some control over their operations and get the government out of their domain. Now they should stay in their domain and fund themselves.

[Dr. Cynic]

I don't see the need. The Northeast has public education from K-College. I don't want to divert tax dollars away from our public schools to pay for private schools.

[Deus Naturae]

Nice new name, but I won't be supporting school vouchers.

In what way is this bill equivalent to a school voucher program?

Offering tax credits to pay for education. Obviously the Northeast offers every student a free education. If that isn't good enough, they ought to pay more.

The tax credits in this bill wouldn't be exclusive to privately or home schooled students. They could also be used to help pay for the cost of school supplies, transit costs for traveling to school, and other things that are just as necessary for public school students as they are for private/home school students.

Nothing is free. The public education system is paid for - through taxes. This bill would simply allow parents to derive direct educational benefit for their children from their tax monies. It would ensure fairness towards parents who prefer to educate their children in other ways.

And if they want their kids educated in "other ways", they can pay for it without a tax credit. And the other things you mention are typical red herrings- this is a school voucher bill plain and simple. Theres really no reason to give tax credits for $100 worth of school supplies or whatever and doing such would only encourage the waste that's already rampant when it comes to paper, etc.

Why should they shouldn't they be able to use their own tax dollars to pay for their own child's education? The purpose of the public education system is to educate children. If parents can educate their children in other ways, using their own money, why shouldn't they be able to?

The tax dollars are to pay for the public education system. Its that simple. Under your logic we should just give everyone who doesn't have children $5000 as well. I'm not terribly interested in reducing funds for the public school system so that those funds are redirected to lily white prep schools and nutty religious institutions. We only just got rid of our wacky education experiment so I would like to see some sanity in the region at least for a while. I was happy to give private schools some control over their operations and get the government out of their domain. Now they should stay in their domain and fund themselves.

The tax dollars pay for the public education system in order to provide education to kids. If the tax dollars can provide education to kids in another way, what difference does it make?

[Napoleon]

*to provide public education to kids

[Deus Naturae]

I don't see the need. The Northeast has public education from K-College. I don't want to divert tax dollars away from our public schools to pay for private schools.

Again, this wouldn't necessarily go to private schools. It could be used for educational materials, transportation costs, etc. And who says it's being diverted form public schools? Nothing in this bill would require us to decrease spending on public education.

[Deus Naturae]

*to provide public education to kids

The purpose of a public education system is to provide education. It doesn't have to be the only way that education is provided.

[Napoleon]

*to provide public education to kids

The purpose of a public education system is to provide education. It doesn't have to be the only way that education is provided.

Its a distinction I make and will not move away from. No government funding for private schools. The northeast already offers ample school choices.

[Deus Naturae]

*to provide public education to kids

The purpose of a public education system is to provide education. It doesn't have to be the only way that education is provided.

Its a distinction I make and will not move away from. No government funding for private schools. The northeast already offers ample school choices.

Where does this bill allow for government funding of private schools?

[Napoleon]

*to provide public education to kids

The purpose of a public education system is to provide education. It doesn't have to be the only way that education is provided.

Its a distinction I make and will not move away from. No government funding for private schools. The northeast already offers ample school choices.

Where does this bill allow for government funding of private schools?

A tax credit is a government expense.

[Deus Naturae]

*to provide public education to kids

The purpose of a public education system is to provide education. It doesn't have to be the only way that education is provided.

Its a distinction I make and will not move away from. No government funding for private schools. The northeast already offers ample school choices.

Where does this bill allow for government funding of private schools?

A tax credit is a government expense.

Not really. By that logic, every Northeast citizen who makes less than $50,000 is receiving government funding because they pay no income tax.

[Napoleon]

*to provide public education to kids

The purpose of a public education system is to provide education. It doesn't have to be the only way that education is provided.

Its a distinction I make and will not move away from. No government funding for private schools. The northeast already offers ample school choices.

Where does this bill allow for government funding of private schools?

A tax credit is a government expense.

Not really. By that logic, every Northeast citizen who makes less than $50,000 is receiving government funding because they pay no income tax.

Even looking at the budget, you will see that a tax credit is a government expense.

[Deus Naturae]

*to provide public education to kids

The purpose of a public education system is to provide education. It doesn't have to be the only way that education is provided.

Its a distinction I make and will not move away from. No government funding for private schools. The northeast already offers ample school choices.

Where does this bill allow for government funding of private schools?

A tax credit is a government expense.

Not really. By that logic, every Northeast citizen who makes less than $50,000 is receiving government funding because they pay no income tax.

Even looking at the budget, you will see that a tax credit is a government expense.

It is classified as an expenditure on the budget because it has an effect on revenues. That's completely different than what you're trying to imply, which is that allowing parents to deduct certain expenses from their tax payments is somehow equivalent to handing out taxpayer money to private schools.

[Deus Naturae]

The debate period is now over. We will now move to a vote on this bill, as written:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Voting will last for 48 hours or until all Representatives have voted.

[Dr. Cynic]

Nay

[Deus Naturae]

Aye

[SWE]

Nay

[BaconBacon96]

I abstain.