THE PUBLIC WILL MUST PREVAIL IN ALLOCATING STATE'S $9 BILLION

It might be argued that Missourians would be ahead if they closed down Jefferson City and divided the state's expected $9 billion for the next fiscal year on a per capita basis. That would mean each man, woman and child would receive a check for $1,772.09 for the fiscal period starting July 1.

It might be proposed, but no one should buy such an argument for a minute.

First of all, the state would still need a Department of Revenue to collect the estimated $4.6 billion that will be deposited in its general revenue account.

Secondly, 52.3 percent of all the state's revenue goes for public schools, higher education and desegregation in St. Louis and Kansas City, making an equitable per capita distribution an impossible goal.

Thirdly, nearly 35 percent of Missouri's revenue goes for human services, another term for public assistance and welfare, aid to dependent children, payments to disabled citizens, and health care for the poor, again making equitable allocation an elusive dream.

And, last but not least, the state would be deprived of such annual diversions as the state fair, the building of a domed football stadium in St. Louis, the construction of new Kansas City convention facilities and the yearly sessions of the General Assembly.

As Gov. John Ashcroft was detailing his annual budget recommendations to members of the Legislature the other day, we could only speculate on whether anyone in that distinguished assemblage had ever wondered if the state would be better served if it simply turned out the Capitol lights and did away with what is known as state government.

Fat chance.

Before anyone takes us too seriously, let it be noted once again that we consider states to be the single most important political entity for all Americans, delivering more vital services and performing more essential functions than any other form of government. Unfortunately, states have in recent years fallen prey to the same afflictions suffered by other units of government: growing bureaucracies, needless and wasteful spending and special interest demands that have little to do with governance. Jefferson City is no exception.

The state's record-high $9.03 billion budget that begins on July 1 will see $272 million taken right off the top for federal court-ordered desegregation efforts in St. Louis and Kansas City. These are funds that must be supplied these two school districts or Missouri would be held in contempt of federal court and presumably all of its 5.1 million residents sent to jail.

To illustrate the horrendous drain on state revenue these federal orders have caused, citizens have the right to know that last October, Missouri spent its one billionth dollar on St. Louis and Kansas City desegregation programs. Kansas City's deseg costs are now exceeding those in St. Louis, where busing constitutes more than one-half of these payments. In Kansas City, state taxpayer funds are being used, under federal court mandate, to construct new buildings, initiate highly expensive curricula and even build swimming pools and playgrounds.

The mind is boggled by the thought of how this money could have been used to improve the educational programs and opportunities for all school children in the state rather than relieve metropolitan-area taxpayers of their obligations to improve their own schools.

The ever-increasing requirements of the federal government on Missouri to increase contributions to more and more congressionally mandated Medicaid programs threaten to disrupt further the state's ability to fund its traditional, constitutionally mandated public services and programs. Missouri's spending for Medicaid has been increased 131 percent since fiscal 1985, and every year since the program began, state spending for these mandates has been accelerated at a higher rate than Missouri's tax-collection increases.

Uncle Sam resembles the shopper who buys without regard to income, except our profligate relative in Washington simply sends his spending bills to Jefferson City and demands payment. Our Founding Fathers would be astonished, and with just reason.

These are a few of the reasons Jefferson City is never able to fully fund important school improvement programs, raise the quality of our colleges and universities and stem a crumbling infrastructure. Not only are we spending all the money we barely have, the state finds its revenue sources diminishing and its revenue collections increasing at a slower pace.

Missouri's projected general revenue growth rate for fiscal 1992 will be even lower than it was during the 1981-82 recession. Next year's tax-collection growth will be around 3.1 percent, a huge drop from the current year's 9.2 rate and lower even than the 3.5 growth recorded at the height of the last recession in 1981. In 1984, the growth rate was a whopping 12.5 percent, which proves that sometimes the old times were, indeed, the best times.

The governor was on solid ground when he insisted that Jefferson City must not increase taxes just to fund so-called "business as usual" programs. There's always enough fat in any budget to see the state through a sagging revenue year.

And few Missourians would quarrel with his contention that certain reforms must be undertaken before taxpayers are asked to cough up more taxes. But the reforms proposed are to be undertaken within agencies under the direct or indirect control of the governor. He should insist that the changes be made and estimate the cost of these initiatives without waiting for legislative action.

The process of getting to the desired goal of better educational services for all Missourians should not become a politically confrontational battle. Rather it should be realized through mutual planning and cooperation between the executive and legislative branches of Missouri government. This is the process implied in the same constitution that requires all public officials to be held accountable to the citizens who choose them.

The will of the people must be Missouri's supreme law.