LEGISLATORS REVIVE SCHOOL BILL

JEFFERSON CITY - A resurrected education reform bill and tax package won approval in the Missouri House Monday, sending it to a conference committee where lawmakers from both houses will attempt to iron out a compromise before Friday's adjournment.

Last Wednesday the same bill was defeated 69-85. But after a weekend of intense lobbying by legislative leaders, Gov. Mel Carnahan and his staff, the measure was re-considered and approved by a margin of 88-71.

The bill includes a new school foundation formula to replace the one declared unconstitutional by a state judge, a $361 million tax increase without a vote of the people, and a number of reforms.

Carnahan and his wife Jean watched from the side gallery in the House as the bill was approved. The governor responded with a broad smile and a thumbs up gesture.

"We have passed a milestone," Carnahan said. "We're going to go forward with the bill."

He acknowledged there were serious differences between House and Senate versions, but said: "I believe we have the parameters of a very good bill and we can work within those in the conference."

Rep. Larry Thomason, D-Kennett, the House majority whip, said several representatives changed their minds after realizing that the measure would be altered in conference.

"One of the big differences was when it was explained that we were going to take the bill and go to conference with the Senate," said Thomason. "A lot of the concerns people have about this bill will be addressed, and if they are not addressed, they would still have a chance to vote no on final passage.

"The conference committee now has to write a good bill, and if they don't, then it could still go down."

One of the representatives that declined to change his vote was Rep. Gene Copeland, D-New Madrid, who declared there was no way he would change.

Copeland has doubts whether the conference committee version will improve the measure significantly, and is particularly irritated about a $361 million tax increase without a vote.

"I would not vote for the bill in any way, without sending the tax to a vote of the people," said Copeland, who is angry that Carnahan campaigned last year by telling people he would support a tax increase for education but would send it to the voters.

"I probably would have voted for this one if he had not made this promise," Copeland said. "I don't like, in principle, public officials running for office making promises and then doing something different after they are elected. I think it hurts his reputation and the reputation of all legislators."

Copeland complained that the reforms put too much of the new tax money into teachers salaries. "I am not opposed to a pay raise for anyone, but the burden of this huge tax increase is mainly for teacher salaries and I know people can't afford it."

Copeland said many representatives were badgered into voting for the bill. "A lot of House members gagged when they pushed that button," he said.

Said Copeland: "The governor and the leadership twisted arms, made promises, and gave jobs. I guess he gave out enough jobs and twisted enough arms to get the votes."

But Thomason said it was the issue, not promises, that convinced lawmakers to change their votes.

"I don't know of a single soul who changed their vote because they were offered something or something was threatened to be taken away," said Thomason. "It is not that kind of issue. I think people realized it was not done when they passed it and that there would be modifications in conference."

Another consideration in their votes, he said, is that legislators are not ready to turn the foundation formula issue over to the courts.

Thomason said many legislators want to resolve the matter because if the courts act, there will be no recourse. "Citizens of this state are better served by the legislative process than they are by a state judge's mandate," said Thomason.

But Rep. David Schwab, R-Jackson, who voted against the bill, said he does not see the courts as a real threat at this point.

Said Schwab: "I don't think at this point we should be that concerned. We just had one man give us his opinion on this, and we have not heard from the Supreme Court yet. I don't know we're that much under the gun with the courts."

Schwab said he doubts there will be major changes in the conference committee and would have preferred having an opportunity to amend the bill on the House floor to modify the reforms and phase in the funding.

"The main problem I've still got with the bill are the reforms," said Schwab, who is particularly opposed to outcome based education and a super board to oversee school districts. "Many people didn't like the reforms in Proposition B, but this bill goes a lot further than that ever did."

Rep. Jim Graham, R-Fredericktown, shares Schwab's concern with the reforms and believes they will cost school districts money they don't have. "Basically, it's not a good package. There are a lot of things in there that will affect our teachers and schools in a negative way," he said.

"I would hope we could come up with a better compromise, but I fear it will basically be the same proposal."

Graham also said the tax package is twice more than what is really needed and that the minimum levy of $2.75 should be phased in.

Graham said he might have been able to support a smaller version of the plan. "Arm twisting is not a good way to get things done," he said.

All Southeast Missouri Republicans voted against the bill, though nine Republicans joined in supporting the measure.

All Southeast Missouri Democrats supported the bill last week, except Copeland and Rep. Marilyn Williams, D-Dudley. On Monday, Williams reversed her vote to yes.

Rep. Dennis Ziegenhorn, D-Sikeston, who voted for the bill last week, was the only House member to change his vote to no.