I believe, along with many, that the upcoming governor race here in our State of Oklahoma will largely hinge on Tornado Shelters (after all, what else goes on in this state?)
I fully believe every school should have some form of safe room to protect the children from such storms, but funding it will be the central problem of the upcoming election. (Now, even if my reader does not reside in Oklahoma, it is worth looking into)
And here, an article from the Daily Disappointment : http://newsok.com/oklahoma-governor-endorses-school-shelter-plan/article/3928514
With emotions still raw from the storm of May 20th, rightly so, any candidate that would come out against protecting the children wouldn’t have a chance, also rightly so.
But let us look at the plans of both candidates: Fallin proposes raising property taxes. This would be an added tax to the citizen. Dorman offers a tax on companies in the state. Do not be fooled; any tax on companies would be an added cost to the consumer, who ends up paying for any costs a company may encounter. Simply, either a tax on the CITIZEN, or a tax on the CONSUMER.
Both plans have negative economic implications. Allow me to propose an alternative: the reduction of expenditures. (Gasp…!)
If a household wants to put in a storm shelter, they have to cut expenses somewhere else to make up for it. The household cannot just raise it’s income on a whim to cover such things. So why should the state be able to?
It’s very possible to cut expenditures, but it seems that is out of the question – for both sides of the aisle. Anything to raise taxes, I suppose…