Widows, Orphans and Red Light Cameras

From what I have heard, State Senator Will Kraus is a good guy. I mean him no harm. But his recent idea to direct fines from red light cameras away from cities to local school districts is a small example of a very bad style of leadership and prioritization that has become too common.  A recent news story in the Republic outlines the idea. (I won't even go into why State Government should keep its snoot out of local government budgets until they balance their own.)

It's politically very easy to not really take a stand on an issue, but endorse it as long as some money goes somewhere that no one can holler about. The poster child for this is gambling. "I don't like it, but all the money is going to education." BALONEY. You just reduce the General Revenue level for education and they get no net increase. The latest example is allocating fixed sums from casinos for a very good cause: veterans. Who could argue with that?

Here's the lesson:  Any time a politician combines a policy issue (e.g., red light cameras) with an allocation issue (e.g., all the fines go to widows, orphans or schools) tell him to vote on the two issues separately so you know where he really stands on both. And stop with the politcal shell games already. 

 

Comments

[Patrick]

I agree with your basic argument, but have to disagree with your gambling example. I thought this debate was put to bed last decade with the defeat of the Classroom Trust Fund.

There has been a net increase in education funding. When gambling was legalized in Missouri the foundation formula was $1 billion. Today it's $3 billion. Gambling revenues account for a little less than $400 million of this.

No one ever promised that the foundation formula would be fully funded and then gaming revenues added on top. With current state revenue levels, the foundation hasn't been fully funded in years. Thankfully we have gaming revenue to make up for some of the shortfall.