What to know about Invest in Education

The citizens initiative Invest in Education Act has been described as a soak-the-rich measure that provokes class warfares.

It has also been hailed as the solution to sustained education funding.

This much is true: The ballot proposal is the only educationfunding idea that’s presently in play for 2018, provided backers gather sufficient signatures to qualify it for the Nov. 6 election.

Not sure how you’d cast your vote on the proposition? Here are some key factors that may guide you. to pay for the 20 percent teacher-pay increase and additional school funding that Gov. Doug Ducey and Legislature have pledged to fulfill in three years.

It also would change the definition of a “teacher” to include nurses, counselors, social workers, psychologists and librarians, which means money intended for teacher pay raises would be diluted.

Forty percent of the money would go toward school operations, including potentially toward pay raises of support staffers such as cafeteria workers and bus drivers.

Help me put the tax into context

Arizona’s top marginal personal income tax rate is 4.54. It ranks 13th lowest in the country. Raising the top rate to 9 percent would jump Arizona to the fifth highest in country.

Make the case for/against the plan

THE PROS:

❚ Income tax is progressive; it is based on the ability to pay;

❚ Avoids raising sales tax, which is regressive (Arizona’s sales tax burden of $35.25 per $1,000 income is already the seventh highest in the nation);

❚ Polling purportedly shows public support for the measure;

❚ Provides raises not just for teachers but for support staff in public schools;

❚ Is backed by a coalition of education and children/family advocates.

THE CONS:

❚ Raises significantly less than the estimated $1 billion needed to pay for 20 percent raise and additional school assistance;

❚ Redefines “teacher” to include other jobs, such as nurses and counselors, thereby diluting raises meant for teachers;

❚ Earmarks 40 percent for other non-teaching jobs the likes of cafeteria workers and bus drivers, further diluting money meant for teachers;

❚ Targets only the richest of the rich, when education is everyone’s burden;

❚ Higher rates may depress entrepreneurship and business growth.