Utterly Meaningless

I thought Paul’s tax credit was a general education tax credit to be used for homeschooling, private school tuition, etc.

Two more quick thoughts — both based on quick thoughts not being enough to figure all this out. 🙂

1) who’s afraid of the big bad tax credit? Seems to me we’ve claimed the per child tax credit for example, without angst (or loss of freedom) over the IRS code defining “child” as under 17, related to and living with us, and having a social security number that I’m willing to write in on the form. Or not, up to me. No strings either way.

Adoptive child credit has a different set of rules besides qualifying for the one above. I don’t qualify for that money. I know other families with both types of children at the same time too. We don’t intrude on each other or get confused, and the IRS isn’t a factor in who we are or what we do with (or for) any of our children.

2) Legislation isn’t always straightforward (duh!) Maybe this candidate by making this proposal is really making a case for something else, say smaller federal government and greater local responsbility close to the taxpaying people? Maybe it’s really an object lesson meant to prod the public into responding as Daryl does, to realize just how little the feds DO pay versus how intrusive the federal K-12 regs have become, to mobilize outrage against kudzu-like regs out of proportion to the federal government’s role?

(another quick thought about Paul’s seeming disconnect – no more than anything else!)
Nance and I use this 2006 Education Week quote looking at 25 years since Reagan’s DOE, to capture the focus of our Parent-Directed Education discussion list:

“K-12 education has morphed as a field. So many of the old ‘movements’ have shattered and regrouped into smaller niches. . . old political alliances have broken down into a range of perspectives. A ‘liberal’ today might be for charter schools or against them, for test-based accountability or not. And ‘conservatives’ might favor a federal role in raising standards or oppose it. In short, the national dialogue has fragmented…”

I thought Paul’s tax credit was a general education tax credit to be used for homeschooling, private school tuition, etc.

Yeah but what difference does that make? He’s refunding $5000 of federal tax money to “encourage” people to pull their kids out of the g-schools. He can’t claim it’s too offset the federal money that won’t be spent because that’s only $900. So where does it appear in the Constitution that the federal government has the right to take tax dollars and give it to me because we choose to home educate?

Tax money is tax money. Politically, it might be easier to sell an education tax credit. After all, it’s for the children.