BE OUR GUEST

David Schwab is the 158th District state representative. He lives in rural Jackson.

Over the past several weeks, I have had a lot of people contact me expressing concerns and questions regarding Proposition B and the future of education in the State of Missouri. I would like to take this opportunity to address some of these issues. Some of the most frequent questions asked are how the legislature dealt with Proposition C and the lottery.

These two issues were dealt with before I was a member of the state legislature. As to the lottery, both gubernatorial candidates at that time stated that if the lottery passed that they would like to see the money go for education. Also, we have found ads with a book and an apple on them which stated, "Vote For The Lottery". However, there was nothing in the lottery proposal, which the people voted on, stating that funds generated would go anywhere other than into general revenue. Our state budget is now close to $9 billion, of which 28 percent goes toward education. If you go back to when the lottery was passed, we have now increased funds for education by more than $250 million per year since that time. The lottery brought in close to $75 million last year, so the actual increase to education is more than if all t~he lottery proceeds had gone to education.

As to Proposition C, it disturbs me as to how the legislature dealt with this. The people supported an increase for education by voting for Proposition C. However, the year that this proposition passed, the normal amount of money that was appropriated from general revenue to education was cut due to the increased funds from Proposition C.

One of the concerns expressed regarding Proposition B was the length of the proposal and the many number of pages involved. This, also, has been hard for me to become accustomed to, but have found that when you are writing a law all details must be spelled out completely to avoid the possibility of loopholes within the legislation.

Another concern expressed with Proposition B was the fact that after 10 years the legislature could reappropriate the funds. I can certainly sympathize with some of the concerns for this, but a lot of the money raised by Proposition B would have been deposited in special earmarked trust funds and could only have been spent on educational programs outlined within the proposal.

After 10 years, some of these programs could well have been obsolete, yet these trust funds would still be established and could only be used for those purposes stated in Proposition B. Therefore, there would be no way to eliminate these trust funds without some specific expiration time stated within the proposal.

Proposition B was written by the governor and the House and Senate leadership in a closed meeting. It was presented to the legislature without time to amend or change any of the language within the proposition.

As far as I was concerned, one of the biggest flaws in Proposition B was the lack of a revised foundation formula stating how the money would be divided up fairly among the school districts. We had worked for months in the House of Representatives and had passed a bill with bipartisan support to create a fair foundation formula. This bill was sent to the Senate, and it would have developed a fair foundation formula and fully funded this formula for the first time. I have visited with each of the schools within my district, and this bill would have increased funds to each of our school districts.

This bill would have capped federal income tax deductions on a joint state tax return at $17,000. This could have been done under the Hancock Amendment without going to a vote of the people. It would have raised $70 million to increase the funds for the foundation formula, and $58 million to raise the deduction for dependents.

This money would have helped elementary and secondary education this coming school year and could possibly have helped us avoid the court dictating a new formula to us for education. I was very disappointed that a number of the educational organizations did not help pass this bill in the Senate, and instead supported only the Proposition B proposal.

At this time, it is uncertain what future proposals will be coming for education. One area that I would be willing to consider would be requiring one-third of the state's budget to go toward education. This would eliminate the continued competition for state funds from all of the different demands of the state. Again, this can become a shifting of funds as to deciding what type of educational programs would be included.

I would certainly be interested in any concerns or comments you may have regarding education in the State of Missouri, and would appreciate your expressing them to me.