Proposals for Education

• Reduce property taxes across the board for every resident and business owner
• Reduce the sales tax in half (down to 3%) – in the case of Maryland
• Reduce expenditures on public education to match waste found in comprehensive audits
• Eliminate reporting requirements for homeschool parents
• Reduce or eliminate any unnecessary building permits for private school construction and enhancements
• Zone localities to take into consideration both private and public schools
• Allow county school boards to negotiate textbook purchases with outside vendors while considering the impact of schools, parents, and students
• Remove decision making from politicians for new public-school construction and place it in the hands of an independent board
• Leave licensing requirements for both public and private school teachers in the hands of an independent board comprised of leaders in the education industry
• End the lottery because it’s never improved education and the money going towards gambling could be put towards more productive use

So, what’s the scope of all this? To put it simply, productivity drives an economy and removing government barriers unleashes prosperity. The first two points above address tax relief which thankfully can be seen as a beneficial double-edged sword. On the one hand, the demand side benefits from having more freedom to allocate resources. Now on the supply side (i.e., businesses) more markets open for existing businesses and potential newcomers to meet demand. With more opportunity on the demand side, the supply side has more incentive to provide enhanced innovation.

Reducing public expenditures means less resources are managed by entities (i.e., government agencies) that are not subject to the profit and loss mechanism in contrast to players in the free market who are subject to this mechanism. So, by reducing the amount that government entities can spend, more resources are available for allocation by players in the free market. With the profit and loss mechanism in mind, businesses can serve the public and gain profit by minimizing waste and by meeting ongoing needs in the market through enhanced innovation. Eliminating waste in the public sector never fails as it always reduces the burden placed on the taxpayer in terms of funding government.

Points four and five address costly obstacles that government impedes on private activity. As noted with homeschooling parents, reporting is involved which requires dealing with government agencies that place a burden on parents, both in terms of time and money thereby inhibiting their ability to educate their children. The taxpayers bear the costs in terms of financially supporting these agencies. Taxpayers also support agencies that place burdens on schools when it comes to other regulations involving things such as permits as mentioned above that effect construction for new and existing schools.

The next two points address fair treatment. Zoning, if it ought to continue, should reflect the needs of the market, not top-down planning agendas. In respect to textbooks in the public schools, there out to be local input that considers the diversity in school systems/regions while respecting the values of parents and their children. Regarding new school construction, parents, teachers, and students are often subject to dog fighting that goes on in their state capitals. By that I mean, politicians with well-meaning interests to bring money to their home districts for new schools collide with legislatures from other parts of the state with the same intentions. Consequently, the process becomes politized and new construction or repairs gets delayed longer than it should. As mentioned, a possible solution is to remove this decision making from the legislators’ hands.

Studying for licensing exams designed by members of the education industry and I say this holds true with any industry, does much more to prepare entrants for their intended field. In an environment with less state required licensing, taxpayers pay less for government as costs are born by industries who can administer and design tests that cater specifically and most accurately to their industries.

Finally, the concept of relying on risky and destructive behavior as seen with gambling to fund the public education system is morally bankrupt. For a parent to look at their children’s textbook knowing that it was funded in part by a system that advances addiction and various hardships is unconscionable. Fiscally, the lottery system is also detrimental knowing the funds it draws in would otherwise go towards local businesses, savings, personal expenses, charity, and other basic needs. Also, the funds coming in from the various scratch off games, etc. provide a false sense of security for legislatures and alters priorities for funding programs while often leaving taxpayers with a feeling of disappointment as they hoped their favorite programs would see increases in funding.

In conclusion, relief from government barriers of various sorts as mentioned thus leading to significant cost decreases drives productivity thereby leading to enhancements in the marketplace with education being no exception.