TELL CANDIDATES: NO PROMISES WITHOUT SPECIFIC PLAN OF ACTION

Presidential and gubernatorial campaigns are loudly touted as the time for the nation and the states to examine the issues and make important decisions for the next four years. We have been repeatedly told that if the United States or Missouri is to resolve pressing problems and face the future with optimism, the candidates for president and/or governor must provide us with the details of their proposal, and then we, the electorate, can make the intelligent decisions required for a great nation and a progressive state.

The only problem with this promise is that it is seldom kept.

First of all, the candidates aren't about to advocate brave, new solutions if they require sacrifice from the very people being solicited for support, contributions and votes. Not even beggars add a qualifier when seeking funds, and no one ever heard such a fund-solicitor say: "This will involve some financial sacrifice on your part, but I need a substantial handout to make it through next week."

The premise also doesn't work because we, the vast unwashed electorate, don't really want to hear about any sacrifices we may have to make the day following an inauguration in Jefferson City or Washington D.C. We want to be happy in the victory of our choice, not reminded that we have some half-baked responsibility as citizens to improve the lot of other citizens, some of whom don't even want to work.

Indeed, the byword of most elections is: Don't worry, everything will be wonderful.

We mention this because the election to select the next governor of our state is now less than two months away. We have the nominees of both parties in place, and sometime between now and Nov. 3, we should expect to hear some concrete suggestions on how the state will deal with some very important problems in the future.

But don't count on it. We may hear some solutions to problems, but unless we miss our guess, these will not be answers to significant problems. Indeed, we have already heard the candidates outline their solutions to problems that don't even rank in the top ten of Missouri's miseries.

It's true that there has been some discussion on how to improve local schools, but unless we missed some terribly insightful solutions offered by either of the candidates, most of what we've heard was discussed in much fuller detail during the primary campaign. The actual facts of Missouri's school problems are these:

1. Most public schools in the state are now receiving less state assistance per student today than just two years ago.

2. The rate of increased enrollment is soon going to escalate, and classrooms across the state will shortly begin to experience such an influx of students that an emergency is certain to occur within a short period of time.

3. Any promise of relief from federal court orders that require several hundred million dollars each year to meet desegregation needs cannot possibly occur until the capital improvement plans that have already been approved are fully funded. The earliest this will occur is 1995, when St. Louis schools begin their final construction stage for new and remodeled buildings. Kansas City's capital building program still has no deadline, which means it can, and probably will, continue several years beyond the one in St. Louis. So if candidates assure us that the state will soon be able to increase its payments to the remaining school districts across the state because integration plans are nearing an end, find out what these wanna-be officials have in mind for the lengthy period of time in between.

Education is not the only problem looming for our state's next set of public officials. Let's mention a few that will have to be addressed shortly after the post-inaugural sobering up in Jefferson City:

1. Missouri has a declining industrial base that holds nothing but woe for the state and thousands of workers who will be told they no longer have jobs in the next few years. So far there has been not even a glimmer of an idea on how to supplement this wage base, yet it is a problem that will have to be faced, and quickly, by the next chief executive, his departmental directors and the legislature.

2. As a report from the office of State Auditor Margaret Kelly makes painfully clear, a large number of the state's counties are moving intractably toward bankruptcy just like a majority of Missouri's public school districts. This problem facing courthouses across the state means fewer and fewer public services, less police protection, substandard services that Missourians have traditionally taken for granted.

3. Our metropolitan cities are, if possible, in even worse financial shape than our counties. Despite the fact that St. Louis now holds the distinction of having the nation's third highest murder rate in the country, there are fewer police officers there today than yesterday. And a year from now, without state assistance, there will be fewer cops on the street than at this moment. Kansas City's financial plight is not unlike that facing St. Louis, exacerbated by a continuing flight to the suburbs and across state lines into Kansas.

4. In an effort to pinch pennies, the state is taking several steps that promise long-range headaches in only a few years. One of the most alarming is the deliberate dismantling of the state's present mental health delivery system, placing it under the direction of for-profit hospitals, care centers and medical professionals. The eventual cost of this policy to save money today is incalculable, but taxpayers will eventually have to shell out additional millions to regain the system.

There are not a few other problems that need immediate attention, but space limits listing them. The point is Missourians need to receive serious discussion and debate on how these challenges will be met. We haven't heard any such discussion, and as the election draws still closer, we're not likely to - unless we demand it. Let's stop accepting promises from any candidate without specific performance pledges.