MAY WE TRY AGAIN TO DISCUSS ORE MONEY FOR EDUCATION?

Longtime acquaintance Professor Tom Harte has made himself the first to respond to an invitation, made in this space last Sunday, to conduct a dialogue on whether and how much to increase taxes to fund Missouri education. (Harte's letter was published yesterday).

Readers may decide for themselves about Professor Harte's letter, though I must question whether a letter so dripping with contempt helps or hurts an effort to persuade the taxpaying public to contribute more to its author's cause.

Sad to say, Professor Harte's letter reveals much about its author. In seven paragraphs of pent-up venom and unrestrained ridicule, he contributes not even one fact to the discussion. A curious persuasive technique, no?

One can hardly doubt that his letter will resonate to overwhelming approval within the echo chamber that is the faculty lounge. But what sort of note does it sound for the general taxpaying public, which after all is the audience to be persuaded? Is the letter a serious attempt to contribute to a much-needed dialogue?

It is most interesting that Professor Harte declares it his class project to spend an entire semester dissecting the columns published in this space. Note that Harte's concept of academic freedom has never included an opportunity for his target to respond in front of his captive audience of impressionable students.

To the limited extent that Harte deals with substance at all, it's noteworthy that he makes no attempt to dispute the facts and figures cited in my article. If we can infer from this that he concedes the accuracy of those figures while disputing their meaning then perhaps some small progress has been made in ferreting out what he sternly lectures us to be "the real issue"(s).

Another question: It can be argued (as Professor Harte does) that we started from a low position years ago, and had much ground to gain in teacher's salaries, as in other aspects of educational funding. But to have moved from an average statewide salary of $16,672 in 1982 to today's average of $28,706 is rather significant progress in a few short years, is it not? (These nine-month figures don't reflect the full benefit package, which includes a retirement program and health insurance coverage, to mention two costly aspects. Add 30-35 percent).

Still another question is left unanswered. It is this: Does there exist a point any point at which proponents of more education funding would ever say we had invested enough in education?

What about reform? Insofar as I understand Governor Ashcroft's position, he's saying that he'll consider backing more taxes at such time as certain key school reforms have been enacted. This is related to the question of what we're getting for the money we spend now. So, a question for all: Are major reforms on the table? Or are the demands for more money so uncompromising that the additional dollars cannot be tied to any such reforms, however popular, compelling, or sorely needed?

My request for a dialogue on education funding is sincere. I want to give tax proponents the opportunity that neither Harte nor so many other professors show any intention of offering me.

Accordingly, I cordially invite Professor Harte to be my guest on "Behind the Headlines", on Channel 13 next Wednesday evening at 8 p.m., or at some other agreeable time. Think of this forum as a second chance to persuade taxpayers.

My Sunday column was a sincere effort to stimulate a dialogue. It is repeated here.