Burnt Orange Report

They also pushed back the injunction date to June 1. I'm guessing Perry will call a special right after the primaries - early April, most likely.

Per QR's summary, the Court said "public school financing does not yet violate the 'general diffusion of knowledge' mandate under any of the three article VII, section 1 requirements."

Expanding on my last comment, I suppose that means the Court finds the overall funding adequate. Anyone read that differently?

I think they just left the adequacy issue on the tablie -- "punting" it back to the Legislature to decide if there needs to be more funding. Again -- that's what I think they're saying.

the court found funding adequate. the plaintiffs lost on that point.

So now the Lege must simply reduce reliance on property taxes without increasing overall school funding? Weak.

The court actually left the issue of funding to the Legislature (See update to my post, above).

And now, for my best Alice Cooper impression...

:: cough ::

"School's out for-ever... duhnuhnuh"

"So now the Lege must simply reduce reliance on property taxes without increasing overall school funding? Weak."

Or they can raise the cap on school district tax rates. Most are already over the cap with "debt retirement" and other little loopholes. But of course if they do that, they will start a taxpayer revolt. Which might result in some "retirement" at the polls.

Very complex matter that to date has yet to address the simple matter of waste within the districts themselves. Until that is addressed, nothing will change and we will see our public education become the worst in the nation.

Here's a snippet of Chris Bell's statement:

"Rick Perry now has a choice. He can either hide behind black robes on the Supreme Court or his hand-picked campaign donors on the tax commission, or he can show real leadership and fight to give our public schools the resources they need to thrive."

Agreed. Again, while the court said that we're constitutionally OK on the adequacy of education, it's important to note that "adequate" means that 55% of students pass the TAKS test. If a student got a 55 on a test, we'd give them a failing grade.

Why, then, shouldn't we expect the same from the state?

This was a total washout for the school lobby. Their lawyers were hosed but the state.

They the school suing lost on every point where there was disagreement. The state always knew the cap of $1.50, hence the effort to lower the property taxes of the last two years, was to uniform since so many districts were at or near the cap.

I guess Perry will get his wish. More money spent in the classroom instead of the courtroom. The schools that spent money on this fool's errand should sue their lawyersm for malpractice.

Who was the idiot who thought the nine folks on the bench who campaign to not legislate from the bench actually would?

Well how about something different -- a NEW IDEA --not just from out of left field but deep center field, which pushes the envelope and is even out of the box. Instead of moving the sales tax, property tax and franchise tax "deck chairs" around on the Titanic, let's do something both the left and right wings can identify with -- in fact let's just lose the wings and act like a unified rocket that will satisfy taxpayers, schools, judges, and give the state a great big star for innovation.

Let's get rid of the school property taxes, sales tax, franchise tax, excise taxes, and a variety of fees. Let's replace all that 20th century thinking with the most progressive tax available, a very small transaction tax without exemption, deduction, or returns to file, immediately collected on all financial transactions carried out in the State and processed through an account registered to a Texas resident or company doing business here. Sounds different doesn't it? Now before you really smart folks start shooting this down, think it through carefully. The rate is the key -- if too big it will be worth considerable effort to evade it BUT if the rate is tiny and the penalties high -- why risk it? The rate to cover all expenditures of the state and the non-state part of school districts (approx $45 Billion annually) is generously 0.2% per side of every transaction. I say generous because it assumes capture of only an estimated 25% of the potential transaction tax base.

The Sharp Tax Commission and Legislature needs to officially sanction a study by, why not UT?, Law and Business Schools along with the Econ Dept to detail the exact size of the tax base, laws required to "capture" it and effects on the state in general. It is well worth the money for a chance to move to the 21st century in taxation. You can review the plan and the credibility behind it, based on a national format, at www.apttax.com. Meanwhile, I will watch this blog for questions and comments.