In an op-ed in this morning’s edition of Raleigh’s News & Observer, retired schoolteacher Ned Gardner of Apex does a good job of giving voice to the reasons that some progressives are unhappy about the state bond package that’s coming up for a statewide vote in March. According to Gardner, it’s not the idea of funding important public structures; its the disingenuous way that the Governor and General Assembly are going about it:
“I will vote ‘no’ on the Connect NC bond issue in March. Do I support the higher education and state parks capital expenditures that the bond would fund? Most definitely. But I reject Gov. Pat McCrory’s “no tax increase” shell-game bond financing. If we support new expenditures for education and parks, we should create a clear revenue stream to pay for it: increase taxes.”
According to Gardner, the fact that the transportation component in the original bond package was removed and replaced by, in effect, a lasting revenue source (i.e. gas tax hike plus the end of the use of highway money for other important state uses) ought to be a lesson. Here’s how Gardner sums up:
“The Highway Fund issue is troublesome. Peter will be robbed to pay Paul. Presumably worthwhile on-going expenditures from the Highway Fund will be discontinued to accommodate the proposed ‘bond’ transportation projects. So to continue those previous on-going expenditures, a source of funding will be needed. I imagine that in the eyes of our current Republican political overlords, the huge state education budget looks like an inviting source for a bit of reallocation.
…The financial obligation of the bond issue if passed will be a given: It must be paid. So the cost will be extracted by the continuing educational trends of stagnant faculty wages, increasing class sizes, a dropping per pupil expenditure and ongoing large tuition hikes in the UNC system (already increased by 42 percent since 2008) and N.C. community colleges (increased by 81 percent since 2009).
If the bond issue passes, I can anticipate McCrory’s self-congratulatory ads in the upcoming gubernatorial campaign – the Champion of Education! My foot. We need to elect politicians who actually support education. And parks. Let’s work on that, and reject this fiscal shame of a bond issue. A grand bipartisan coalition of Democrats, tea party groups, far-right bloggers and your ordinary Republican voter (who views a bond issue with the same relish as a colonoscopy) can do it!
The bond campaign motto is, ‘Vote yes to invest.’ I say, ‘Vote no, but vote for Democrats who will properly fund education and parks – and quit giving tax cuts to the rich.’”
Many other progressives have a different view of the matter, of course. From their perspective, passage of the bonds is a pragmatic way to lessen the impact of the bad situation conservative leaders have produced. It will be fascinating to see which side holds greater sway in March and what it says about the long-term political debate in North Carolina.