I seriously doubt there are any undecided voters, but I’m just as sure many will cast their ballot based on very little factual information. Sadly, few people have the time even if they have the interest, to attend meetings of their party committee or candidate forums or issue forums. That is a danger in Maine because it’s very easy for ‘special interests’ to get questions on the ballot and national groups abuse our process to put cleverly or badly worded questions before the voters. These questions appear straightforward:

“Do you want to add a 3% tax on individual Maine taxable income above $200,000 to create a state fund that would provide direct support for student learning in kindergarten through 12th grade public education?”

Behind that question is the actual language of the legislation, a little over 1000 words which can be downloaded from http://maine.gov/sos/cec/elec/upcoming/index.html. It’s pretty hard reading because, as with all legislative language, there are multiple references to other parts of Maine’s laws. Of course it’s also pretty difficult reading because it was written by advocates schooled in crafting language that completely masks the meaning of what’s being said. We elect legislators to endure the torment of reading such documents and sitting through days of mind numbing hearings, some of it, maybe, making a little sense. They also are supported by knowledgeable professional researchers and by the Attorney General’s office in interpreting exactly what the language says and doesn’t say.

Before any of us vote on any of the 5 referendum and one bond questions it is our duty and our solemn responsibility to understand what the language behind the question actually says. That’s not available in advertisements or from newspapers or from either the proponents or opponents of the question. It is in fact only available if each of us is able and willing to spend the time our legislators would spend individually and in groups reading, considering and debating the actual legal language of the bill, and questioning experts.

So, with half my space already used, I implore anyone thinking of voting on question 2 to answer for themselves the following:

1. What evidence is there that any of our education shortcomings can or will be solved by additional funding? Are you impressed by the improved results obtained over the past ten years where spending increased more than 40% while enrollment declined 14%?

2. Do you know how much of this increased funding will go to your school district? Did you know that one third of Maine’s school districts will receive nothing? Did you know the money goes predominantly to urban districts (60% to 12 schools in Southern Maine) and virtually nothing goes to rural districts?

3. Did you know that the phrase ‘direct support for student learning’ means salaries and benefits for teachers, technicians, guidance staff, health staff, media assistants, and librarians? None of that money will fund building improvements, laboratories, supplies, or equipment that facilitates learning. (Did you know the question is sponsored by the Maine Teacher’s Association?)

4. Did you know the actual language of the bill DOES NOT assure that the money will go to schools at all but this will increase the tax on incomes over $200,000 by 42% over its current level? Did you know that Maine already has the second highest rates in New England?

This material and more is available for further review at: http://votenoonquestion2.com/.

One point the website does not address is the requirement in the bill that every school administrative unit must file a report “Detailing how the funding…was used” and that the fund may be used for “the necessary expenses”. Consider the hours that will be required to keep and then compile the data and whether any but those 12 Southern Maine schools will receive enough funding to pay for yet another report.

Improving our school RESULTS will take more than hiring additional ‘direct support’ people. I suggest the fundamental problem with our schools is not in our schools at all, but in our homes and families. If we want more ‘direct support’, I believe any teacher will tell us we would do well to ditch the egregious requirements for detailed record keeping and reporting that serves no purpose other than reallocating ‘direct support’ to feeding a ponderous, incompetent, remote federal bureaucracy. We desperately need improved results from public schools but Question 2 does nothing to establish measurable goals and demand accountability: It’s no solution.

Another View is written on a rotating basis by a member of a group of Midcoast citizens that meet to discuss issues they think are of public interest.