Imagine two families — one chareidi, the other secular
— living in the State of Israel. For our purposes we'll
call the head of the chareidi family Rav Israeli and the head
of the other family Mr. Israeli.
Despite the vast gaps separating the two in terms of their
way of life and beliefs, they do share something in common in
their day-to-day lives. Every month the state treasury
reaches into their pockets, extracting considerable sums in a
variety of different ways. Perhaps in Rav Israeli's case the
tax authorities deduct from his wife's salary whereas in the
case of Mr. Israeli the deduction is taken from his own
salary — to the Income Tax Authority and the State
coffers it makes no difference.
But that's not all. VAT and other indirect taxes are
collected with every consumer item both families purchase.
Likewise when the two respective household heads buy
apartments for themselves or for their grown children the
national treasury takes a cut. And the list goes on.
At the neighborhood market Mr. Israeli and Rav Israeli
sometimes run into another neighbor, a new immigrant, who
gives them enthusiastic lectures based on the civics class he
takes as part of the ulpan program at the Absorption
Center. In Civics he learned the State of Israel collects
various taxes, but "the money comes back to you"; every
citizen pays taxes on his income and expenses — and the
State returns the money to its citizens in the form of
various services.
Mr. Israeli and Rav Israeli decide to go to the Finance
Ministry to hear how this is carried out in practice.
Mr. Israeli is first in line. The clerk smiles at him
graciously, launching into a long explanation of all the
services the State provides its citizens, e.g. roads,
infrastructures, education. "Do you have children? Are they
enrolled in school? That costs a lot of money. The State pays
for the facilities, the equipment, the teachers' salaries,
etc. In this area alone you receive thousands of shekels
worth in benefits on a regular basis. Where does all this
come from? From the tax money we collected from you. The
money comes back to you!"
Rav Israeli waits patiently in line. When his turn comes he
has to forgo the cheery smile. Since he already heard the
lengthy explanation while waiting for his turn he poses just
one small question: "When Mr. Israeli told you about the
money the State takes from him I understood every word. The
process was very familiar to me based on my own experience
with the family budget. But when you explained to him how the
money comes back, what you said sounded detached from
reality. The principals of my children's schools told
me they receive partial funding and do not benefit from all
the abundance you described. I have to pay large amounts for
tuition every month and donors are needed to make up for the
remaining budget shortfall. So why doesn't the money come
back to me, too?"
The clerk smiles in embarrassment. "Look, that problem has
nothing to do with the State treasury. You don't receive
equal funding because you don't meet the basic educational
requirements — the Core Curriculum program and concepts
like `modern education,' `university education' and
`statehood.' The State would be happy to fund your children's
schools if they only met these criteria. Believe me, we want
to give you back your money through government services, but
it is simply impossible. In short, it's not a money problem,
it's an ideology problem."
"I see," says Rav Israeli. "But when all is said and done the
money does not come back to me. Whatever the reason may be,
the money you took away from me isn't coming back. Where does
it go?"
"You can rest assured," replies the clerk. "Your money is
going to a good cause. Remember your neighbor from across the
street, the man standing in front of you in line? The money
you forgo because of your fanaticism and rigid thinking goes
towards educating his children. Although he has plenty to get
by on, the money you add to State revenue allows us to
further improve the services he receives."
"But who says I'm willing to forgo my money?" demands Rav
Israeli. "I never agreed to give it up. The money is supposed
to come back to me, just like every other citizen. If you've
decided not to fund my family's educational institutions for
ideological reasons, give me my money back or stop collecting
taxes from me.
"This is not a matter of principle, but a purely monetary
issue that only you, as a representative of the State
treasury, have the responsibility to answer: If the money I
pay does not come back to me — for whatever reason
— you have no right or justification to collect it from
me to begin with. Even assuming you are right and the state
is not willing to take part in funding education without the
Core Curriculum program and `higher education,' that still
does not justify your charging me for these educational
services, which are supposed to be a part of the services the
State provides its taxpayers.
"So let's set ideology aside and talk fiscal fairness. My
money should be coming back to me. It was not given as a
donation to maintain the State treasury, which other citizens
benefit from fully. So why don't you do a calculation, either
a monthly or annual calculation, to determine the
quantitative benefits the secular citizen receives and give
me rebates I can use to cover the additional expenses I have
to pay to educate my children."
"Hold it there just one minute," flushes the clerk. "This is
beginning to sound like chareidi blackmail."
*
As ridiculous as it may sound, this is the harsh reality of
the situation. In recent years, State authorities have
employed an astonishing diversion tactic. They made every
effort to drag us into unending ideological disputes on the
substance and form of education, pushing aside the most
fundamental question: Where's the money?
The State is "gracious" enough to acknowledge that parents
who put their children in the chareidi education system
fulfill the Mandatory Education Law and it does not view them
as parents who leave their children at home or let them roam
the streets. The State merely shakes off its obligation to
fund this system, whose curriculum contradicts national
convictions. Thus the debate is taking place on the monetary
plane alone.
Our national representatives solemnly inform us that the
State simply cannot provide equal funding for a system of
education that does not meet the State's ideological and
educational criteria. Assuming this is logical, and according
to their thinking the government simply cannot consent to
fund an educational establishment that does not fall into
line, this still does not explain why they can continue to
levy income tax and VAT in such an egalitarian manner on
thousands of citizens when it is known in advance that some
won't benefit from the government's "basket of services" and
won't get their money back like everybody else.
The demagogy of conjurers sitting in the Finance Ministry and
on the High Court creates a paradoxical distortion: taxes are
collected from the citizens for the citizens, drawing no
distinctions based on race, religion or ideology of course
— but these tax monies only come back to citizens if
they have the right ideological stance.
The time has come to break this vicious circle. The co-op
known as the State treasury does not execute its task fairly.
So now they should make up their minds. Either the State must
find a way to fund chareidi education without discrimination
and without ideological coercion or it should give fixed tax
rebates calculated down to the last shekel for all citizens
who do not benefit from the basket of government services.
Years ago economists were embroiled in a debate over the best
way for the State to subsidize various services and essential
goods. Should the government help by subsidizing the price of
the product or by giving monetary aid directly to the
citizen? The interminable debate surrounding the issue of
funding for chareidi education has to come to an end in one
of two ways: either help the institutions or help the
parents. The other alternative of government exploitation has
to stop.
Just as the country cannot be expected to fund education it
disapproves of, neither can an entire segment of the
population be denied a fair return on the money it spends on
taxes. This is the painful truth and we should repeat over
and over until it becomes idiomatic: we, the chareidim, are
paying for secular education!
Nobody needs an advanced course in logical deduction or
mathematics to understand this simple equation. Taxes =
services. Fewer services should mean lower taxes.
Rav Israeli is sick and tired of paying Mr. Israeli's tuition
bill. Those in charge of the State coffers have to make a
decision. If they give they shall receive, if not, let them
give the money back.
