WILL CARNAHAN BE THE PROBLEM-SOLVER?

It seems only fair to give our state's governor-elect, Mel Carnahan, a few days to enjoy his election-day victory November 3 before reminding him of the problems he will face beginning in January. It may not seem fair to rain on the Carnahan parade, but he will have to return to reality very quickly if he hopes to have programs in place that will deal with pressing state problems that will soon demand his attention.

The bitter campaign that Carnahan just went through, along with his GOP opponent, Bill Webster, was relatively easy compared to the obstacles the governor-elect will encounter as the new year begins. Running for office and running the office in question are two very different things, and Carnahan has enough experience in state government to recognize this fact. Campaigns are all about winning the hearts of voters; governance is about creating solutions to problems that will not solve themselves and then finding the funds to operate them.

Anyone can run for office; few have the ability, intelligence, energy and background to administer the state's most powerful public office.

We don't want to exaggerate the problems confronting the next governor, but reality suggests that they are numerous enough and serious enough to raise plenty of concerns, not only from the chief executive but among the general public. When Carnahan finishes the term of office to which he was just elected, Missouri will be just three years from the 21st century, a time just about everyone believes will be a watershed event for America, and thus for our state and its 5.1 million citizens.

How well Carnahan performs during his four-year stint on the Capitol's second floor will determine just how well Missouri is prepared to enter the new century and be able to compete in it.

Mel Carnahan said throughout this fall's campaign that he had numerous ideas about how he would govern if elected, and his goals for the state matched those of his primary and general election opponents in volume and even innovation. But as we noted during both campaigns, few of the candidates addressed problems that have worried Missourians for decades, choosing to focus on dilemmas that were better publicized and lent themselves to relatively simple solutions.

For example, the continuing underfunding of the state's School Foundation Program was addressed by every gubernatorial candidate in both the primary and general elections. And virtually all agreed this problem could be solved by rewriting the formula, finding additional revenue and ending the federal courts' overpowering grip on the state treasury to fund desegregation orders in St. Louis and Kansas City. As Ross Perot would undoubtedly say, "Problem solved."

But that isn't all of the problem. Increased enrollments in Missouri's public school system by the end of this decade could serve to bankrupt the state if provisions are not devised very quickly. Missouri will have a 15.2 percent increase in grades 9 through 12 by 1989, and taking care of these additional students will strain not only local district resources but those of the entire state.

As for utilizing existing revenue totals to improve the state's very large public higher education system, again it is a problem of too little too late. An attempt to raise admission requirements may provide a short-term solution to this problem, but the escalating cost of college degrees means that public institutions will become even more popular in the next few years, placing still greater strains on their ability to handle students moving from private to public colleges and universities. The state needs an answer to this challenge as well.

There was an abundance of campaign rhetoric on job creation in Missouri, yet the reality is that much of it was theoretical and virtually all of it was problematic. One study firm placed Missouri last in the country in retaining workers jobs in 1991, and indeed, the state lost 13,000 industrial jobs and a total of 44,247 total job slots last year. Job migration will continue to plague the state throughout this decade, placing us in an even more precarious position when the new century dawns unless dramatic new programs are devised and implemented.

One-third of all workers in Missouri lack proper medical insurance, with a large number having none at all, and while our state is no worse off in this area than many others, we still lag behind states that have inaugurated effective programs to meet this problem. Connected to this concern is a customary Show-Me caution in revising, trimming, toughening and sharpening social programs that Missouri is becoming more and more responsible for financing. The diminished number of federal dollars coming into the state for welfare assistance is a trend that we must not only recognize but resolve within our own borders. Uncle Sam's propensity toward welshing is not going to end anytime soon.

Missouri, with two large urban areas, finds itself being ranked as a high-crime state because of inner-city crime that has been exacerbated by widespread drug abuse. While there has been no shortage of possible solutions, the real ones have eluded officials as crime rates have soared, destroying not only a large number of urban neighborhoods but the faith of residents to place their trust in traditional agencies. This year's candidates mentioned the subject repeatedly, but it will remain for the next governor to deal with the problem and regain control of these neighborhoods.

Large numbers of outstate communities lack both the expertise and the resources to restore these areas and make them viable towns and cities once again. Again, it a challenging problem for the governor-elect, one requiring more time and effort than has been devoted to it in the past.

There are other challenges, too, requiring extraordinary effort and dedication from the state's chief executive. We won't list them here, but knowledgeable officials in Jefferson City know what these problems are, and none of them can be solved quickly or with Band-aids. As governor, Carnahan will have the option of solving them or passing them on to his successor.

The winner is never elected to do the latter.