Teachers' union wants businesses to give and give

For the sake of argument, let's say the Nevada teachers union is successful in its newly launched efforts to extort money from businesses.

Union representatives have estimated they can raise some $250 million a year just by sticking their hands into a business person's till and pulling out 4 percent of his net profits, provided those profits exceed $50,000 per year.

To do that they'll need to get just over 44,000 registered Nevada voters to believe that teachers are underpaid, that there aren't enough of them to go around and that the $250 million per year will eventually make our students better and brighter.

Then they'll have to convince the Nevada Legislature to listen to the 44,000 or so registered voters, or put the measure on the ballot and let all of the voters settle it during the 2002 elections.

The union teachers have some valid issues, although there are huge differences in how they are defined. Nevada probably does need to pay its teachers more money. But not all of them. A union card doesn't make you a good teacher, but the system unfortunately isn't established on merit.

And Nevada could probably use a few more teachers. Or at least get rid of the bad ones and spend more money to replace them with good ones. But again, the system isn't designed to work that way and that's probably not what will happen if the union gets its hands on another $250 million per year.

And, let's not forget, that would be $250 million on top of the money the state already spends, or will spend to pay and hire new teachers. Once a tax is implemented, you've got a friend for life.

In launching its initiative Saturday in Reno, teachers union chiefs painted private business as the devil himself. "Today, the burden falls on individuals and families as the primary source of revenue for schools," NSEA President Elaine Lancaster told the crowd of union teachers and supporters. "Yet, one group who profits greatly from educated, qualified workers and consumers pays little or nothing to support public schools. That group is business."

Take that, you freeloading, money-grabbing business people, you. No wonder some of our schools are failing. You've been paying little or nothing to support them.

OK, so there is some property taxes. And then there are those silly sales taxes. And before I forget, there are all those business licenses, employment taxes, insurance payments, retirement contributions, workers compensation and a host of other fees, dues and taxes you must pay before Uncle Sam even steps in to take his 34 percent or so pound of flesh.

That doesn't even include the contributions you make to your community. Most businesses that have been around for any length of time give back to their community without being forced to do so by the teachers union. As a matter of fact, many of those contributions go to the schools. Uniforms, ballpark signs, books, field trips and a host of others.

As to the "individuals and families" having to carry the burden for school funding, Ms. Lancaster must assume that business owners don't fall under that category. They all live inside their businesses and don't have families.

Sorry. Most business owners I know go home at night to homes and families where they pay more taxes and continue to contribute to their community, schools and churches.

Besides, if this tax is implemented, most businesses will simply pass it on to consumers, so families and individuals will end up paying anyway. But that's OK with Ms. Lancaster because her union calculated it would amount to just another $7 per year, which is what they say about every single tax hike I have ever seen. "It'll only cost the same as a six-pack of beer," they explain. Today the average family pays the equivalent of 6,000 six-packs in taxes.

Ms. Lancaster told the cheering crowd Saturday that a recent poll indicated 45 percent of businesses agreed they were greedy, under taxed and would be more than happy to support the initiative. She didn't say whether those particular businesses made less than $50,000 per year in net profits, thus exempting them from the 4 percent tax.

Then again, they could have been using the same polling company that had McCain and Bush neck and neck two months ago.

It does seem likely that the teachers union will get the 44,000 signatures it needs. After all, they have 22,000 teachers in the union alone.

Fortunately, there will still be lots and lots of time for this scheme to get a good going over by the Legislature and probably eventually by Nevada voters.

In the meantime, we ought to start thinking about this prosperity thing the teachers union says its been missing out on.

Nevada has been prosperous primarily because it has refused to be like California. Over the years many businesses have fled the tax-oppressive, anti-business Golden State where all those taxes and all that lottery money haven't made schools any better.

If this initiative is successful the teachers may eventually find themselves inside an empty vault. Believe it or not, it takes a lot of work and sweat to make a business profitable and you can only take so many fees and taxes before you finally pull the plug.

There are many good and fine teachers out there who certainly deserve more money for what they do. That's why there should be greater emphasis on merit than on tenure. Once that's been settled and there's still no money to meet our expectations for education, it's up to the Legislature to respond.

If the teachers union wants to change things, focus on the Legislature and the ballot box, not on extortion notes. Business people I know already give more than their pound of flesh.

Jeff Ackerman is publisher and editor of the Nevada Appeal.