Losing the Children

Gov. George Deukmejian has angrily criticized Bill Honig, the state superintendent of public instruction, for his attack on the governor’s inadequate commitment to education in the proposed budget.

Deukmejian’s intemperate response does nothing to advance the debate on how the state can protect and build on the important gains made recently in the California schools.

In past budgets Deukmejian admirably and consistently demonstrated his appreciation of public education by fully funding reforms. Because of his commendable decisions, school districts have reduced class sizes, raised teachers’ salaries and addressed the special needs of many pupils.

In the current budget, though, the governor unfairly eliminated programs for gifted children, underachieving children, physically handicapped children and minority children to pay for aid that will allow all school districts to further reduce class size--a worthy educational goal that should not come at the expense of specific groups of students.

By Honig’s calculation, despite the proposed small increase, school districts would not keep pace either with inflation or with rising enrollments. California, already ranked dismally in the bottom half of the nation based on the average of spending per student, would lose even more ground.

The governor’s budget would specifically eliminate major state aid that helps urban districts address the larger numbers of students from economically depressed neighborhoods and the higher incidences of campus crime and vandalism. The big city school districts such as Los Angeles, Long Beach, San Francisco and Oakland stand to lose the most.

Also, severely overcrowded districts would be forced to scavenge for scarce additional classroom space to accommodate reduced classes. Deukmejian’s budget would provide aid for schools that operate on a year-round calendar to allow more students to use the same number of desks, but, although all districts qualify, his allocation would barely cover the amount for which the Los Angeles district would qualify.

Deukmejian’s budget will face more intense scrutiny before the California Legislature. Restorations and revisions are to be expected; in his defense, there is not enough money to go around --despite his unrealistically rosy picture during his recent State of the State address--but it is a serious mistake to heap most of the burden on the futures of schoolchildren.

As another Republican governor, James R. Thompson of Illinois, astutely put it during his recent inaugural address, “Chances are if we lose the child we lose the adult--to mental hospitals, penitentiaries, crime, poverty and ignorance.” Fewer children will be lost in a state that persistently provides high-quality public education.

Deukmejian should not angrily dig in his heels, but should work together with Honig and the Legislature to renew the state’s critical commitment to public education.