PROS AND CONS OF PROPOSITION B DEBATED: NO

Joseph Orthwerth represents District 18 in Missouri. He serves as Assistant Minority Leader of the house.

"It's Bait-and-Switch time Again in Jeff City"

When it comes to the tax-and-spend schemes of government bureaucrats, the old sales tactic know as "bait-and-switch" comes in awful handy. In fact, state government in our Show Me State has shown Missouri voters time and again that they know how to make "bait-and-switch" work on a grand scale. On Nov. 5, state officials are counting on Missouri voters to fall for the same tired trick once again.

Let's look at the record:

* In 1982 state voters approved Proposition C, designed to dramatically increase funding for public education in Missouri. But, the legislature used the bulk of Proposition C revenues to replace normal increases in the education budget and diverted that money elsewhere.

* In 1984, Missouri voters legalized the state lottery after being assured by promoters that lottery proceeds would be spent to improve educational funding. Instead, the General Assembly has designated that lottery revenues be deposited in the general revenue fund.

* Now Missouri voters are being asked to approve a $385 million tax increase to fund "educational improvements." Once again, the legislature has asked voters to write a blank check for unspecified improvements and trust the General Assembly to spend the money wisely.

This latest package will appear on the ballot as Proposition B, and B is the right letter for it. B for Bamboozle.

If you take a close look at Proposition B, you'll find it chock full of phony gimmicks and public relations puffery. The so-called "reforms" touted are either transparent or irrelevant, and have more to do with building the egos of politicians than the skills of our students.

Missouri taxpayers are being asked to write hefty checks for both the elementary and secondary, and higher education sectors:

* $150 million would be appropriated to the foundation formula, a complex mechanism which determines the allocation of state aid to local schools. Yet the legislature will not make the decisions about the distribution of those dollars until after the election. The foundation formula has the effect of penalizing school districts who help themselves, while rewarding districts who have low local property taxes.

* $127 million will be set aside for "mission enhancement" at state universities and community colleges. The initial objective was to refine the missions of the state's higher education institutions and strengthen program excellence. Sine the Legislature will be given the job of "enhancing" these missions, it is almost a certainty that more program duplication and inefficiency will result.

Supporters of Proposition B would like you to believe that the added sales, income, and cigarette taxes you will pay will be an investment in our children's future, and will help prepare our young people for the employment demands of the 21st century. Don't believe it for a minute! The Economic Survival Act is another runaway big-government gravy train. It will not bring our students what they truly need - smaller class sizes, motivated teachers and administrators and adequate facilities, equipment, and educational resources.

What's needed is a constitutional amendment requiring that a guaranteed percentage of the state's annual budget be set aside for public education. Every year as the state determines its priorities, the share of the budget pie carved out for our schools and colleges gets smaller and smaller. At the same time, the state continues to mandate new programs for local school districts to implement without the dollars to carry them out.

The only way to assure that education receives first claim on state revenues is to lock it into the constitution, rather than placing false hope in another legislative "bait-and-switch."