Finicky funding

Although this space is many times used to condemn the often squishy positions taken by student leaders and local elected officials, it's worth noting that the student governments of the schools in the University System of Maryland are rallying around the cause of raising Maryland's corporate tax to push for dedicated funding of higher education. They'll even rally in Annapolis today with unprecedented organization to make their voices heard.

It's no surprise that it has come to this. With higher education underfunded to the point that it puts the value of our hard-earned degrees at risk, state politicians have failed miserably when it comes to committing to the future of a highly educated state workforce. Students have been right to support levying a higher tax on state businesses in order to move higher education spending from discretionary to mandatory.

But the trouble begins where student leaders have stopped short. In their rush to organize support for the corporate tax, they decided to remain vague on their support of other pieces of Gov. Martin O'Malley's larger plan. We recognize it isn't easy to get majority support for a plan that includes controversial items such as an overhaul of the flat income tax structure, raising the sales tax by a percentage point and increased luxury taxes on some services. It's important, however, to take a stand on some of the make-or-break items that will be hotly debated during this special session - especially ones that could have an impact on students once they graduate.

Supporting only the corporate tax ignores the fact that, without other pieces of the plan in place, a corporate tax won't be enough to close the deficit, let alone the higher-education gap. That's selling ourselves short. We're highly likely to become long-term contributing members to the state's overall revenue, and we deserve to have a voice now.

Of course, in the spirit of "practice what you preach," we offer a complete reversal of opinion from years past: down with slots. This editorial board has in the past viewed slots as a one-shot chance at permanent funding sources for the university, but that's not what O'Malley has proposed. The corporate tax is the main source, and, while O'Malley is on the right track to bring the state's sales tax closer to those of other states, and move away from a flat income tax to one that taxes more people who can afford it, there's just too many negatives when it comes to slots. Crime is a huge issue in College Park, so adding slots just up the road at the Laurel Race track just isn't going to help anything.

The corporate tax, even with its potential to make the state less business friendly, is far more preferable than a crime-inducing vice tax that could change the image of the state forever.