LM_NET: Library Media Networking
Same Hancock, different amendment. The one in MO is called Hancock II. A
few years ago, before Cong. Hancock was elected to the House, he
sponsored an initiative petition in Missouri which resulted in a tax lid
such as you describe. Last year, the state legislature passed SB 380
which raised taxes for education and Hancock II is a second initiative
petition to try and get SB 380 thrown out.
You are correct about these issues crossing state lines. The original
Hancock Amendment was patterned after Proposition 13 in California and
was passed only a couple of years following it.
The other amendment on was attached to the House education
funding bill at the federal level. I think the bill has been passed, but
don't know happened to the amendment.
Joyce Miller
jmiller@services.dese.state.mo.us
On Wed, 23 Mar 1994, Judy Listrom wrote:
> It may be the same amendment as mentioned pertaining to homosexual
> lifestyel, but there is a Hancock Amendment which would requrire a
> vote of the people for any tax measure. Ramifications are the total
> negation of S. 380 which means that all state education funds end up
> in limbo. It also means that if we want to raise library fines from
> 5 cents to 10 cents it would take a vote of the people. If lunch
> prices are raised it will take a vote of the people. School districts
> would lose what little automomy they have. A petition is being
> circulated for signatures to have this amendment on the Nov. ballot.
> On the surface, it describves no taxation without vote, but it has
> the same potential for desctruction as the famous California
> proposition which , indeed, has seriously damaged those schools.
> Please do not sign the petition and educate yourself about this
> amendment and encourage your PTAs to rally against it.
> It could be catching across state lines.
> Judy Listrom@delphi.com
>
LM_NET
Archive Home