Proposition 38 gives community colleges the middle finger.

On the surface, Molly Munger’s reactionary proposition looks beautiful. Who doesn’t want to help the children? Tax increases are often in the guise of helping kids or other altruistic reasons. As a result, those propositions are often not scrutinized.

Underneath the veneer, Proposition 38 is a mean-spirited, long-lasting tax increase that damages community colleges.

California’s official voter information guide says, “Proposition 38 provides $10 billion annually to restore school funding by raising state tax rates on income after all deductions.”

But not so fast.

In the first four years only 60 percent of the tax revenue goes directly to schools, 30 percent to repaying debt and 10 percent to early childhood programs. Contrary to the touching television advertisements, this $10 billion number vanishes before it reaches schools.

Proposition 38 locks in the tax increase for 12 years and can be changed only with another public vote. That is $120 billion dollars of tax revenue to build new bureaucracy that will heap more red tape on an already paralyzed K-12 school system. The schools will now have to jump hurdles for needed funding, instead of focusing on education. Proposition 38 “provides K-12 funds on school-specific, per-pupil basis, subject to local control, audits and public input,” according to the California’s state official voter information guide.

Proposition 38 irresponsibly ignores the community college system. What is the point of preparing K-12 children for an eroding higher education system? The struggling economy funnels increasing numbers of students to the community colleges, so funding needs to increase, not decrease. Ignoring the community college system as Proposition 38 does would have a disastrous effect on our ailing economy because community colleges are the engines that drive our economy.

Our schools do need funding and the few who argue against it would be wrong. As the population of California grows, so should the budget for the school system.

California’s schools rank 30th in the nation, according to a report published by the Editorial Projects in Education Research Center. In order for California to pull away from the middle of the pack, the funding per student needs to be increased. California spends $9,375 per student, according to the Public Education Finances report of 2010, by the U.S. Census Bureau. Compare that with Maryland, which spends $13,738 per student and ranks numero uno in the report published by the EPERC. In order for California to compete it needs to raise its per-student funding.

We need a solution to the budget problems facing California’s schools, but Proposition 38 is not the answer. We need a balanced proposition that will address all levels of education, including community colleges. While Proposition 38 does not fund community colleges, Proposition 30 does.

In a nutshell, Proposition 30 is a temporary tax increase, with revenue going to K-12 schools, community colleges and the California State Universities. The estimated tax revenue from Proposition 30 ranges from $6.8 billion to $9 billion. Paige Marlatt-Dorr, director of communications at the California Community College’s Chancellor’s Office, said Proposition 30 is crucial for the short term health of the Golden State’s two-year institutions.

“$210 million of Proposition 30 revenue would go to community colleges,” she said.

Overall, 11 percent of the tax revenue will be divided between the CSU system and community colleges.

Proposition 30 also stops the $380 million in “trigger cuts” to community colleges, which would go into effect on January 1, 2013, an issue Proposition 38 fails to address.

“That would be over $1 billion in cuts to community colleges in a three-year period,” according to Marlatt-Door.

California’s community college system will go from limping to crippled, even if Proposition 38 passes.

Proposition 38 is irresponsible and disastrous to community colleges. If Proposition 38 passes and get more votes than Proposition 30, it voids the benefits of Proposition 30. Southwestern college would take a $4.8 million cut in January and another cut of $11.6 million for the 2013-14 academic year. More classes, services and problems would be eliminated.

There is no debate, vote no on Proposition 38.