State Senator Tom Davis – one of the leading fiscal conservatives in the S.C. General Assembly – spoke in Columbia, S.C. today in support of his teacher supply tax credit, one of the few free market academic reforms the Palmetto State has ever passed.
Davis’ tax credit – which was included as a proviso in the 2013-14 state budget – levels the playing field for teachers at private and parochial schools, who for years have been forced to pay out-of-pocket for their classroom supplies. Teachers at government-run schools, on the other hand, have long received reimbursements for their supplies – although there is very little accountability in place over these disbursements.
“For years public school teachers have been reimbursed by the government for school supplies that they purchase for their classrooms, and it is way past time for teachers in private and parochial schools to be similarly reimbursed,” Davis said. “Limiting such reimbursement to public school teachers is not only inequitable, but reinforces the mistaken notion that government is the sole legitimate educator of our children.”
“Nothing could be further from the truth,” added Davis, who was speaking before parents and educators gathered to celebrate Milton Friedman’s birthday.
We agree …
This amendment – and another market-based budget amendment championed by S.C. Sen. Kevin Bryant – are obviously small steps on the road to genuine academic freedom in South Carolina. But they are important steps – and they must be protected, especially with the state’s left-of-center mainstream media singling out market-based reforms for defeat in 2014.
Ironically, despite wails of protest from the state’s education establishment regarding the lack of “accountability” in the free market, there’s even more accountability regarding these private and parochial tax credits than the teacher supply reimbursements doled out in the government-run schools – which are subject to the whim of individual school districts.
Teachers wishing to claim the credit must save receipts and file paperwork with the S.C. Department of Revenue (SCDOR) – and check off the box on line twenty-two (22) of their South Carolina income tax form.
“It’s not a handout, it’s a way to reimburse teachers for money they are actually spending,” said Neil Mellen, president of South Carolinians for Responsible Government (SCRG). “This is better than what the public schools do.”
Indeed … in fact it is a terrible commentary on the state of government-run education in South Carolina that vacations for bureaucrats are fully-subsidized by taxpayers yet teachers have to receive credits for school supplies.
Anybody else think those priorities are out-of-whack?
96 comments
Will Folks fellating Tom Davis. Old news. Nothing to see here, people.
Apparently they have kissed and made up.
Davis and Ravenel each have a chapter in the sexploits of Folks tell all book.
Will Folks fellating Tom Davis. Old news. Nothing to see here, people.
Apparently they have kissed and made up.
Davis and Ravenel each have a chapter in the sexploits of Folks tell all book.
Really Folks? You agree with this or Davis pays you enough to agree with it? The state reimbursing teachers at private institutions… Why can’t the institution do it?
The veil on the Howie Rich private eduscam has slightly parted to give you a glimpse of what it is really all about.
I don’t think Davis pays him – Howie Rich, does, though.
Folks has never denied that. Using his logic, that means it’s THE TRUTH.
Mirroring posts by Howie, Bill Wilson, Cato, Americans for Limited Government, and supporting candidates that happened to have their campaigns funded by Howard Rich’s shadowy groups? Just a coincidence, bro. ;)
Really Folks? You agree with this or Davis pays you enough to agree with it? The state reimbursing teachers at private institutions… Why can’t the institution do it?
The veil on the Howie Rich private eduscam has slightly parted to give you a glimpse of what it is really all about.
I don’t think Davis pays him – Howie Rich, does, though.
Folks has never denied that. Using his logic, that means it’s THE TRUTH.
Mirroring posts by Howie, Bill Wilson, Cato, Americans for Limited Government, and supporting candidates that happened to have their campaigns funded by Howard Rich’s shadowy groups? Just a coincidence, bro. ;)
Look, I’m all for a free market system but this is kind of bs. Why should the state pay for private school teachers supplies? If the private school wants to reimburse its teachers for supplies they purchace on them then that is perfectly fine. Private compandies should not need tax payer subsidies
Man, if you’re going to swing on behalf of public schools, at least check your spelling bro. Kills the message…
Look, I’m all for a free market system but this is kind of bs. Why should the state pay for private school teachers supplies? If the private school wants to reimburse its teachers for supplies they purchace on them then that is perfectly fine. Private compandies should not need tax payer subsidies
Man, if you’re going to swing on behalf of public schools, at least check your spelling bro. Kills the message…
Is it a true tax credit or merely a tax write-off as in cost of doing business? Teaching supplies is a genuine cost of doing business and anyone who teaches, whether public or private should be allowed to deduct it from their income. But in any case, it’s another problem which would be solved by the Fair Tax.
Don’t you think calling the “Fair tax”, “Fair theft” might be more accurate?
You are a naughty girl.
lol…that’s a funny insult. So if I was a chick would you agree that Fair Theft is more accurate?
Nairy, at all.
“Nairy(sic), at all. Please don’t tell me you believe in a regressive income tax.”
How would accurately describing the Fair Tax, as Fair Theft, be construed as support for the regressive income tax?
lol…you act like magically changing to the name to “Fair” makes it so. Neither are “fair”, they are simply different forms of theft.
If you want to build a strawman instead of answering the question, so be it.
The Fair tax is not theft. Neither is a flat tax. I hope you went to the example I gave you. A regressive tax IS theft. You don’t penalize someone because they are better at something than others.
Tax is not theft when it’s called “Fair”, ok.
You are right, I am wrong. Thank you for showing me the errors of my ways. I’m always glad to be cleared of cognitive dissonance.
Carry on.
Oh, btw, “penalizing” someone might include taking their money against their will….no matter how much or why-but I digress.
You are a puzzlement. Are you saying that we should not pay taxes? Look, I will be the first person to say we get little value for the taxes we pay. Is THAT what you’re saying? Or are you just dicking with me?
Rather than try to read into everything, let’s start with something basic:
Do you think that if taxes weren’t mandatory, that people would pay them?
If taxes weren’t mandatory, they wouldn’t be taxes. The word “tax” in verb and noun form infers a mandatory state. You “tax” my mind, ie, you force me to think. A tax is a mandatory levy on something.
So if anyone comes to you and “mandates” that you pay them money and you do not want to do that, is it theft?
Not if they have a constitutional right to do so.
Where does the “right” in the Constitution come from?
I should be more specific in asking about this constitutional “right” you claim, and clarify with the word “authority” as well.
Where does the authority of the Constitution to decide what property of mine it can take come from?
Is it a true tax credit or merely a tax write-off as in cost of doing business? Teaching supplies is a genuine cost of doing business and anyone who teaches, whether public or private should be allowed to deduct it from their income. But in any case, it’s another problem which would be solved by the Fair Tax.
Don’t you think calling the “Fair tax”, “Fair theft” might be more accurate?
You are a naughty girl.
lol…that’s a funny insult. So if I was a chick would you agree that Fair Theft is more accurate?
Nairy, at all. Please don’t tell me you believe in a regressive income tax. Everyone who earns should pay the same rate. Even the poor should pay something, even if it’s a buck. But those who earn should pay the same rate. The fair tax simply does that at the production point. It doesn’t have to be that, it could be a flat tax, but I would point you to the following analogy to consider the flaws of the regressive tax: http://www.swampfoxnews.com/archives/pp201009.html#sep12 .
“Nairy(sic), at all. Please don’t tell me you believe in a regressive income tax.”
How would accurately describing the Fair Tax, as Fair Theft, be construed as support for the regressive income tax?
lol…you act like magically changing to the name to “Fair” makes it so. Neither are “fair”, they are simply different forms of theft.
If you want to build a strawman instead of answering the question, so be it.
The Fair tax is not theft. Neither is a flat tax. I hope you went to the example I gave you. A regressive tax IS theft. You don’t penalize someone because they are better at something than others.
Tax is not theft when it’s called “Fair”, ok.
You are right, I am wrong. Thank you for showing me the errors of my ways. I’m always glad to be cleared of cognitive dissonance.
Carry on.
Oh, btw, “penalizing” someone might include taking their money against their will….no matter how much or why-but I digress.
You are a puzzlement. Are you saying that we should not pay taxes? Look, I will be the first person to say we get little value for the taxes we pay. Is THAT what you’re saying? Or are you just dicking with me?
Rather than try to read into everything, let’s start with something basic:
Do you think that if taxes weren’t mandatory, that people would pay them?
If taxes weren’t mandatory, they wouldn’t be taxes. The word “tax” in verb and noun form infers a mandatory state. You “tax” my mind, ie, you force me to think. A tax is a mandatory levy on something. Now, if you want to discuss whether or not a tax is a moral or ethical event, we could do that.
So if anyone comes to you and “mandates” that you pay them money and you do not want to do that, is it theft?
Not if they have a constitutional right to do so.
Where does the “right” in the Constitution come from?
I should be more specific in asking about this constitutional “right” you claim, and clarify with the word “authority” as well.
Where does the authority of the Constitution to decide what property of mine it can take come from?
LOL at the shameless shilling! Also, please answer Polyphemos’ question. He’s correct about the expense write-off/deduction.
LOL at the shameless shilling! Also, please answer Polyphemos’ question. He’s correct about the expense write-off/deduction.
This is crap, it is subsidization of for-profit schools. Once again, it is corporate/business America feeding at the trough. I know a lot of public school teachers who fund supplies out of their salary because of inadequate funding of public schools. The free market is not the answer for all things unless we want to live in a bifurcated society where the rich continue to receive and everyone else has to pay. I will agree that the administration of public schools needs to be scrutinized where we have way too many school districts and a bloated Department of Education in South Carolina.
Of course it is. The “free market solution” being touted for education in this state has always been to simply transfer tax dollars from public institutions to private ones. Hell, without that, you’re basically just advocating for the complete destruction of public schooling being afforded to every child and declaring a “every man for himself” mentality when it comes to educating children. When you look at the average or median pay in SC, you quickly realize that a vast majority of the state’s population is completely and utterly incapable of paying for private schooling for themselves, so most people would very quickly realize that the destruction of public schools would result in a big middle finger to a good portion of children in this state.
Not only that, but destroying public schools wouldn’t help private schools. The parents who couldn’t afford public education before won’t suddenly be able to afford it now. That’s why we can’t destroy the tax system that funds schooling, we just need to find a way to get the “desirable” students and the funding that comes with them into private institutions, preferably ones that donate to your campaign if you’re a politician, or ones that support your ideologies if you fund politicians, so that money can be continuously recycled into the system those who want to control government created. Public schools will still exist, we need them, they are what house the undesirables. Minorities, kids who need remedial education or extra attention, kids with special needs, kids who don’t have much to go back home to.
The point isn’t to fundamentally change the system, or to strip it of things that make it unjust, it is to alter it in a way that appeases a different group of assholes.
This is crap, it is subsidization of for-profit schools. Once again, it is corporate/business America feeding at the trough. I know a lot of public school teachers who fund supplies out of their salary because of inadequate funding of public schools. The free market is not the answer for all things unless we want to live in a bifurcated society where the rich continue to receive and everyone else has to pay. I will agree that the administration of public schools needs to be scrutinized where we have way too many school districts and a bloated Department of Education in South Carolina.
Of course it is. The “free market solution” being touted for education in this state has always been to simply transfer tax dollars from public institutions to private ones. Hell, without that, you’re basically just advocating for the complete destruction of public schooling being afforded to every child and declaring a “every man for himself” mentality when it comes to educating children. When you look at the average or median pay in SC, you quickly realize that a vast majority of the state’s population is completely and utterly incapable of paying for private schooling for themselves, so most people would very quickly realize that the destruction of public schools would result in a big middle finger to a good portion of children in this state.
Not only that, but destroying public schools wouldn’t help private schools. The parents who couldn’t afford public education before won’t suddenly be able to afford it now. That’s why we can’t destroy the tax system that funds schooling, we just need to find a way to get the “desirable” students and the funding that comes with them into private institutions, preferably ones that donate to your campaign if you’re a politician, or ones that support your ideologies if you fund politicians, so that money can be continuously recycled into the system those who want to control government created. Public schools will still exist, we need them, they are what house the undesirables. Minorities, kids who need remedial education or extra attention, kids with special needs, kids who don’t have much to go back home to.
The point isn’t to fundamentally change the system, or to strip it of things that make it unjust, it is to alter it in a way that appeases a different group of assholes.
What a load of shit. If these private schools were any good, i.e., supported by the market, their teachers wouldn’t have to buy supplies, the school would buy them.
This is nothing more than yet another giveaway of taxpayer’s money to private school, a subsidy hypocritically supported by Will Folks: The biggest “Rino” of them all.
What a load of shit. If these private schools were any good, i.e., supported by the market, their teachers wouldn’t have to buy supplies, the school would buy them.
This is nothing more than yet another giveaway of taxpayer’s money to private school, a subsidy hypocritically supported by Will Folks: The biggest “Rino” of them all.
Davis was quick to post the Obama Nazi pic on his FB site. Davis has become quite the pos. btw when’s his debate with that school kid he railroaded.
Davis was quick to post the Obama Nazi pic on his FB site. Davis has become quite the pos. btw when’s his debate with that school kid he railroaded.
Davis should instead work to fix those upside down priorities and stop with the piling on of more feel-good but meaningless and taxpayer funded subsidies.
By the way, did Davis get a chin implant? This pic is an improvement over your other stock photo.
It’s the squashed down nose, which looks almost normal in this photo…has ole Tom had a little work done?
And, the eyes. They are about as close together as eyes on a human can get.
Oh, hell, he’s just a freak all around.
Davis should instead work to fix those upside down priorities and stop with the piling on of more feel-good but meaningless and taxpayer funded subsidies.
By the way, did Davis get a chin implant? This pic is an improvement over your other stock photo.
It’s the squashed down nose, which looks almost normal in this photo…has ole Tom had a little work done?
And, the eyes. They are about as close together as eyes on a human can get.
Oh, hell, he’s just a freak all around.
Why not have the school pay for their supplies like they should be doing in the first place? Teachers make jack squat as it is, and even if they are getting reimbursed for it, they shouldn’t have to be jerked into buying their own chalk. Wouldn’t it make more economical sense for government to buy supplies in bulk via whoever offers the cheapest price, rather than reimbursing someone for running over to the local Staples or Walmart?
If you concede the schools should be paying for it and teachers shouldn’t even be worrying about reimbursements, then Davis isn’t asking for a level playing field, he is asking for further taxpayer subsidization of private schools. Surprise surprise, a “school choice” supporter wanting more gubmint cheese for private school administrators.
Why not have the school pay for their supplies like they should be doing in the first place? Teachers make jack squat as it is, and even if they are getting reimbursed for it, they shouldn’t have to be jerked into buying their own chalk. Wouldn’t it make more economical sense for government to buy supplies in bulk via whoever offers the cheapest price, rather than reimbursing someone for running over to the local Staples or Walmart?
If you concede the schools should be paying for it and teachers shouldn’t even be worrying about reimbursements, then Davis isn’t asking for a level playing field, he is asking for further taxpayer subsidization of private schools. Surprise surprise, a “school choice” supporter wanting more gubmint cheese for private school administrators.
Mr. Davis,
I run a small business here in South Carolina. I have a number of employees who feel the need to buy extra things to make their work life easier and to make them more productive. I do think those things make would make their job easier, but I can’t afford to pay for them. Would you be so kind as to introduce a law that would allow my employees to get a tax credit, for the cost of those things. They would be ever so grateful, and I assure it would be for a worthy cause.
Mr. Davis,
I run a small business here in South Carolina. I have a number of employees who feel the need to buy extra things to make their work life easier and to make them more productive. I do think those things make would make their job easier, but I can’t afford to pay for them. Would you be so kind as to introduce a law that would allow my employees to get a tax credit, for the cost of those things. They would be ever so grateful, and I assure it would be for a worthy cause.
Taxpayer subsidy for private businesses = crony capitalism
Oh, the check must be in from Howie, huh? This and the attack on higher ed..trying to get your work done all in on e day?
Taxpayer subsidy for private businesses = crony capitalism
Oh, the check must be in from Howie, huh? This and the attack on higher ed..trying to get your work done all in on e day?
How did you get that picture of Davis before he hid his demon eyes?. Looks like he is ready for a scene in Supernatural.
How did you get that picture of Davis before he hid his demon eyes?. Looks like he is ready for a scene in Supernatural.
Is he about to gag on a load of Sanfraud jizz?
Is he about to gag on a load of Sanfraud jizz?
We appreciate the gesture, but school supplies are not the issue. Private school educators are underpaid when compared to public school teachers, and having to buy school supplies is nothing compared to other things we have to pay for. For example, we have to pay for gas to get to school. Many of us have to drive across the county to get to work. This cost thousands of dollars a year, not to mention the wear and tear on our cars.
Many of us also have to pay for daycare because of our long work hours. Daycare is very expensive, making it very difficult for private school teachers to make ends meet.
Frequently we have stay late at work to grade papers or meet with parents. This can put a strain on the family budget. Many times I have to buy my family dinner at a restaurant because I was unable to get home in time to get dinner on the table. It is just unfair there is no compensation for these things.
I could go own, but I think its clear that private school teachers are treated abysmally in South Carolina. So, please consider expanding this law to cover the things that will really benefit private school teachers, like gas, day care, and automobile mileage. As Mr. Mellen says, we are not asking for a hand out. We are just asking to be reimbursed for money we are actually spending.
So? That’s the situation for everyone who works.
But everyone else works for themselves. We work for the children!
Surely, you’re being facetious.
But, if you’re not, you are a great example of why SC parents should keep their kids in public school.
Certified much?
This must be a joke. I also teach but at a public school and I pay for gas and childcare, etc. You choose if you want to work in a privately funded institution. No one is making you. I interviewed at several private schools upon graduating since they were the only ones hiring and made the choice to go into another field until I could work in a public school. Mind you, making more at that job than I do currently. I spend hundreds of my money for children whose parents don’t care enough to send basic supplies- a problem not faced in a private school where parents can afford the tuition or at least care enough to find a way to provide for their children. It sickens me when people even attempt to compare public and private education in terms of money. Your frustrations fall on deaf ears.
Well obviously you are just opposed to free market reforms.
We appreciate the gesture, but school supplies are not the issue. Private school educators are underpaid when compared to public school teachers, and having to buy school supplies is nothing compared to other things we have to pay for. For example, we have to pay for gas to get to school. Many of us have to drive across the county to get to work. This cost thousands of dollars a year, not to mention the wear and tear on our cars.
Many of us also have to pay for daycare because of our long work hours. Daycare is very expensive, making it very difficult for private school teachers to make ends meet.
Frequently we have stay late at work to grade papers or meet with parents. This can put a strain on the family budget. Many times I have to buy my family dinner at a restaurant because I was unable to get home in time to get dinner on the table. It is just unfair there is no compensation for these things.
I could go own, but I think its clear that private school teachers are treated abysmally in South Carolina. So, please consider expanding this law to cover the things that will really benefit private school teachers, like gas, day care, and automobile mileage. As Mr. Mellen says, we are not asking for a hand out. We are just asking to be reimbursed for money we are actually spending.
So? That’s the situation for everyone who works.
But everyone else works for themselves. We work for the children!
Surely, you’re being facetious.
But, if you’re not, you are a great example of why SC parents should keep their kids in public school.
Certified much?
This must be a joke. I also teach but at a public school and I pay for gas and childcare, etc. You choose if you want to work in a privately funded institution. No one is making you. I interviewed at several private schools upon graduating since they were the only ones hiring and made the choice to go into another field until I could work in a public school. Mind you, making more at that job than I do currently. I spend hundreds of my money for children whose parents don’t care enough to send basic supplies- a problem not faced in a private school where parents can afford the tuition or at least care enough to find a way to provide for their children. It sickens me when people even attempt to compare public and private education in terms of money. Your frustrations fall on deaf ears.
Well obviously you are just opposed to free market reforms.
By the way, thanks Fits for bringing to light this Davis give away! Just something else buried in the evil budget that you always rail against! Just depends on who is paying your bills, right! What a load of shi$!
By the way, thanks Fits for bringing to light this Davis give away! Just something else buried in the evil budget that you always rail against! Just depends on who is paying your bills, right! What a load of shi$!
Accountability…right. What is to stop one of these teachers from buying something, making a copy of the receipt and then returning it? Nothing. Maybe Will can go to each classroom and perform an inventory each year.
The fact that you SCRG shows how clueless you really are.
Accountability…right. What is to stop one of these teachers from buying something, making a copy of the receipt and then returning it? Nothing. Maybe Will can go to each classroom and perform an inventory each year.
The fact that you SCRG shows how clueless you really are.
I generally agree with Davis however have you taken a look at the tuition to private schools in the Columbia area alone? The institution should be funding those supplies. Also, look at what the parents have to send in with their child as supplies. In cases like Heathwood and Hammond, I believe the tuition is more than enough to fund classroom supplies. In the case of schools such as Northside Christian- I’d prefer my tax money not be used to perpetuate the cult-like message they teach their students.
I generally agree with Davis however have you taken a look at the tuition to private schools in the Columbia area alone? The institution should be funding those supplies. Also, look at what the parents have to send in with their child as supplies. In cases like Heathwood and Hammond, I believe the tuition is more than enough to fund classroom supplies. In the case of schools such as Northside Christian- I’d prefer my tax money not be used to perpetuate the cult-like message they teach their students.
What part of PRIVATE does Tom Davis not understand? Private for profit does not deserve tax subsidies. Just another way of diverting taxpayer monies and supporting the agenda to eliminate public education.
Public school teachers should not have to buy their own supplies. SC is a travisty of misplaced priorities. It’s not “A great day in SC” no matter how many times you are forced to say it!
What part of PRIVATE does Tom Davis not understand? Private for profit does not deserve tax subsidies. Just another way of diverting taxpayer monies and supporting the agenda to eliminate public education.
Public school teachers should not have to buy their own supplies. SC is a travisty of misplaced priorities. It’s not “A great day in SC” no matter how many times you are forced to say it!
BS, the teachers in state schools are not reimbursed. My wife teaches and we spend well over $500 a year that we don’t get back on supplies. Our government is not only out of control but is really stupid.
BS, the teachers in state schools are not reimbursed. My wife teaches and we spend well over $500 a year that we don’t get back on supplies. Our government is not only out of control but is really stupid.
Will and Tommy sitting in a tree K-I-S-S-I-N-G.
Will and Tommy sitting in a tree K-I-S-S-I-N-G.