The Nevada education system has not been proved to be deficient. Thus, other than being unconstitutional, I find any proposal to create a state income tax for public education to be seriously incompetent (Article 10, Section 1, 9, "No income tax shall be levied upon the wages or personal income of natural persons").
Nevada's high-school dropout rate leads some to believe that this proves faulty performance. Unfortunately, conventional wisdom and my fellow conservatives assert strongly and without merit that the cause is located within the educational system.
Any decision process that considers the collection and expenditure of massive resources through additional taxes to solve a problem without first having identified its location and the change that caused it would be an outrageous mistake and an abuse of public trust.
Shouldn't we pinpoint the exact location before wasting tax money on a deceptive and illusary target?
According to the Editorial Projects in Education Research Center, 47 percent of Nevada students graduate from high school. If we want 100 percent to graduate, the problem is that 53 percent do not graduate. However, while a step in the right direction, just having defined the problem is only the first step.
If the schools were at fault, why did 47 percent graduate in "spite" of the system?
What is the cause of the lower Nevada high school graduation rate? Where is that cause located? What was the prophetic change that preceded that cause?
Unless by chance or trial and error, no problem can be solved without finding a relevant change. The illusion that the school system has changed for the worse over the years and is the cause of the lower graduation rate is not credible. Likewise, if there were positive changes, and the problem is located in the schools, the graduation rate would have improved. Nevertheless, there is little change in the school system. The problem is located elsewhere.
Where, then, is the change that is responsible for the dropout problem?
In a March 4, 2009, commentary in the Nevada Appeal, I wrote: "Parents must be responsible for students' success. ... Many parents experience an uncomfortable feeling that their criticisms of the school system are not fully factual, not even reasonable and without empirical evidence."
For many years I have proposed that parents and government - parens patriae - are the real culprits. Over the years, escalating governmental intrusion has usurped the parental role by taking the "part of the parent." Likewise, parents have allowed it to happen, voluntarily abandoning their parental responsibilities as the rightful managers of their children's education, handing it off to a willing but hamstrung educational system.
This is a serious quandary. Can we blame parents and government usurpation as the change that caused the problem? If we apologize to the school system and transfer the blame to parents, we would be in deep trouble. Parents will become outraged. It would be like taking a government handout away from an able-bodied citizen who has become dependent upon government welfare.
Again, "Parents must be responsible for students' success" - not the school system. Parents should motivate and teach children how to learn in concert with educators, which, in turn, should provide the opportunity for the children to apply their learning skills.
We must ask the question, "What is the difference between parents who support the school system, prepare their children for school, and direct and support them throughout the educational process and those parents who do not?" Why are these students successful and the others are not? Researching the difference between these two sets of family and student characteristics will pinpoint the disparate features of those who graduate from high school and those who do not.
Such a structured approach would be a welcome alternative to a foreboding tax increase. With the data in hand and organized community participation, Nevada could, at little cost, be a shining light leading to profound excellence in the national educational environment.
• Dan Mooney of Carson City is an occasional contributor to the Nevada Appeal.