Las Vegas Sun

March 28, 2024

Jon Ralston dares lawmakers of both parties to give the rhetoric a rest and put their energy into developing ideas for education

"This is an enormous Christmas wish list. It is very big."

- Sen. Barbara Cegavske, R-Las Vegas, reacting to school superintendents asking for a $1 billion spending increase, Reno Gazette-Journal, 11/30/06

After decades of hearing Democratic legislators beg for education money and Republican lawmakers insist it's not just about the dollars, isn't it time Cegavske & Co. started putting some ideas where their mouths are?

The policy-free zone known as the state capital - every odd-numbered year for four months - teems with shibboleths about education. Democrats prattle on about ascending to the national average in school spending (yes, let's try to get to mediocre if we can) while Republicans bleat about accountability (without any accountability about what that really means).

Now, as we return to the biennial cycle of the education lobby lugging a very large tin cup northward, the reactions are all too familiar. Cegavske made her insightful comments at an interim education committee meeting this week in Carson City. And she then added, according to the Gazette-Journal, "You are just coming for money. What is it that you can do that doesn't cost money?"

Indeed, Senator, what are these superintendents thinking? Why can't they attract enough teachers, pay for school supplies and have quality extracurricular and sports programs without spending any money? What is wrong with them?

Of course, these superintendents with their so-called iNVest plan don't expect to get every component fully funded.

The plan includes 5 percent teacher raises ($342 million), enhanced health benefit costs ($105 million), full-day kindergarten ($158 million), textbooks ($48 million) and safety measures ($45 million). Yes, Senator, money just might matter.

And yet, I am sure Cegavske and some of her 62 colleagues are whining about how terrible it was for the school advocates to come forth with such an extravagant proposal. Her public comments show the facile, politically expedient approach that biennially is applied to the state's most salient issue.

Anyone who doesn't think it will cost a lot of money to turn around Nevada's public education system is either willfully ignorant or incredibly stubborn. Money is not the only solution, but it is a large part of it - just look at what Agassi Prep can do with $2,500 per pupil more than the average public school receives in the middle of North Las Vegas.

What frustrates anyone who cares about the issue and has watched the Carson City debate for any length of time is that the rhetoric doesn't change and any forward steps are incremental and truncated by fear of doing something that could be visionary and long-lasting - and politically risky. Gov. Kenny Guinn, who barely kept up with the state's growth despite opposition from within his own party, might acknowledge that his legacy will be more about not falling further behind than getting ahead of the curve.

I can't say I'm too optimistic about Gov.-elect Jim Gibbons, whose ideas on the subject exist within a narrow spectrum - from expressing skepticism about all-day kindergarten to touting the Education First initiative, which even fellow Republican Bill Raggio, the Senate majority leader, called "sounds-good, feels-good legislation" in this week's Gazette-Journal.

The only reason for optimism is that everyone has a chance to etch something on Gibbons' tabula rasa. And the power behind the throne, incoming first lady Dawn Gibbons, actually supported increased education funding during the 2003 session.

Instead of just mouthing cliches to get their names in the newspapers, perhaps Sen. Cegavske and others will consider some real debate in 2007.

How about a full-throated discussion of all-day kindergarten, with national experts flown in on both sides of the issue?

How about a debate on what the real per-pupil spending gap is and what a reasonable goal might be?

How about a real to and fro on what merit pay proposals actually make sense and which ones would be unworkable?

Those are just on the tip of the education iceberg. And if the debate sinks to the usual rhetorical level, if Nevada inches closer to an adequacy lawsuit because the standards have fallen so far, blame the Cegavske mentality of money isn't everything. But also blame the Democrats, in thrall to the teachers union, for being too one-dimensional in their thinking.

It's time for both parties to put ideas where their mouths are.

archive