Image Credit:
Canva
Reform California Chairman and candidate for State Assembly Carl DeMaio penned an op-ed for the San Diego Union Tribune that ran on September 24, 2024 breaking down the truth behind Prop 2 on your November ballot. Read highlights from the Op-Ed or read the full story below:
California’s politicians know that voters want the best education possible for our children. That’s why every time they want to raise our taxes or put us deeper into debt they claim our schools will get all the benefit — but the truth is the money never makes it far into the classroom.
Proposition 2 continues this bait-and-switch game. Proposition 2 would borrow $10 billion in bonds with a massive $17.5 billion repayment cost over 35 years — a rate of 75 percent! Wall Street bankers win big with Proposition 2.
California is in the middle of a budget crisis and approving the bonds on the November 2024 ballot will max-out the state’s borrowing limit. Currently your individual share of state bond debt is $2,460 — and Proposition 2 will increase your cost.
Proposition 2 rewards irresponsible state and local politicians who have mismanaged our finances. Proposition 2 came about during negotiations this year over the massive budget state and local budget deficits as the easy way to plug the gap without eliminating wasteful spending in these budgets.
In addition to being reckless fiscal policy, Proposition 2 will do nothing to fix our poor-performing schools.
Nearly two-thirds of California students in public schools are failing math proficiencies and a majority are failing reading and writing proficiencies. Instead of focusing on improving curriculum and instruction on the fundamentals, California politicians are trying to introduce divisive social and political agendas into the classroom and fighting with concerned parents.
Proposition 2 does nothing to improve the quality of instruction in our schools, but instead simply seeks to build fancy new facilities.
...
Finally, Proposition 2 contains a requirement that requires that any contracts awarded under this bond has to use project labor agreements (PLAs).
PLAs allow school districts to avoid fair and open competition on these contracts in favor of union-only firms. In doing so, Proposition 2 will discriminate against small and minority-owned businesses.
According to the Coalition for Fair Employment in Construction (CFEC), PLAs result in a 10 to 20 percent increase in the cost to taxpayers for projects while reducing the chance that hiring will benefit local workers.
Just who benefits from these discriminatory project labor agreements contracts required by Proposition 2? Politicians who receive campaign contributions from union political action committees funded by the dues generated by union-only projects.
***
.jpg)
.jpg)
