2-Minute ‘Debate’ on Schools Fails Voters, Children

Every survey of California voters shows that they rank education as one of the most important problems facing the state. It’s constantly No. 1 or No. 2.

The latest Times poll finds it No. 2 behind illegal immigration. Democrats place it No. 1.

And why not? Roughly 6.3 million kids attend 9,553 oft-maligned K-12 public schools in California. Plus, 2.5 million students are enrolled at community colleges.

Taxpayers are digging deep. Counting universities, half the state general fund ($102 billion) is consumed by education. ($50 billion).

In all, kindergartens through community colleges are spending $55 billion -- 75% of it from the state, 25% from local property taxes -- under Proposition 98.

So a lot is at stake: tax money and children’s minds.

Therefore, when the question of how to improve public schools in an increasingly diverse state is allotted only two minutes in an hour-long candidates’ debate -- the only debate of the gubernatorial campaign -- it’s mind-boggling and irresponsible.

For me, it was the absolute low point of the Oct. 7 televised debate that, in itself, was the low point of the entire campaign.

Blame a flawed format with no rules, but a sole moderator trying to make them up as he went along while increasingly scolding the candidates for acting like long-winded politicians. That’s what they are, of course, and it’s why any debate needs pre-set rules with follow-up questions.

It wasn’t until two-thirds of the way through the debate -- after an irrelevant question about building a high-speed train and a sophomoric query about personal character in public life -- that Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Treasurer Phil Angelides finally were asked about public schools.

Moderator Stan Stathem, president of the sponsoring California Broadcasters Assn. -- a former small-town TV anchor and Republican assemblyman -- asked the question this way: “I’m very worried about time.... I’m going to ask a question and see if you can each answer it in less than 60 seconds.... What kinds of policies would you support to improve the performance in California’s public schools, in one minute?”

One minute each for the most important problem a governor confronts and one of the most complex in society.

First up was Schwarzenegger:

“It is very important that we pay attention to fund education fully.” (He didn’t, however, until this year.)

“No. 2, that we pay attention to our after-school programs and preschool programs, that we support our university system and ... community colleges, that we pay much more attention to vocational or career tech education.

“It is very important also to go for accountability. Because right now the state is paying a lot of attention to how much money we spend, but not enough on accountability. We must be accountable to make sure that the dollar goes into the classroom and follows the child, not to the adults.”

Not to higher teachers’ salaries.

Then it was Angelides’ turn:

“We’re not going to make it in California, to our dreams, if we’re 48th out of 50 states in educational achievement, 43rd ... in what we spend to educate each child, 40th ... in the number of high school kids who go directly to college....

“I’m not going to cut education like Gov. Schwarzenegger did.” (To avoid it, Angelides would raise taxes on the rich and corporations.)

“I’m going to set a goal to do the following:

“Reduce our dropout rate by 25,000 kids a year, expand charter schools, [provide] more instructional time for the kids who are struggling hardest ... get more kids going to college ... so we have the skills to compete in the global economy.

“Lower tuition fees, increase financial aid, double the number of high school counselors.

“And finally ... the most important thing is to have the best teachers in the classroom. We need to recruit 40,000 new teachers.... I’m going to encourage the brightest and best young people to [teach] math and science and English.”

Then the candidates were forced to drop the subject so Schwarzenegger could ask this pressing question of Angelides: “What is the funniest moment during your campaign?”

“Every day is just a hoot,” the underdog Democrat replied.

Later there was this weighty question by the moderator: “What are you most proud of in each of [your] careers?”

Look for the self-serving answers elsewhere.

Days afterward, I asked Angelides to elaborate on what he’d do for schools.

Rather than venturing off on global so-called trade missions as Schwarzenegger eagerly plans, Angelides said, he’d spend his time going to university campuses and technology companies to recruit bright teachers. That’s a better way to build California’s economy, he asserted, than “taking the Arnold show around the world.”

He’d provide bonuses and other incentives for the most talented teachers. For at-risk kids, he promises smaller class sizes.

Schwarzenegger isn’t saying much about any second-term education agenda. Rather, he’s promoting his record this year. With Democratic legislators, he increased the number of counselors, expanded arts, music and PE programs, implemented his 2002 after-school initiative and signed the “lemon law,” allowing principals to veto teacher transfers to their schools.

One advisor, requesting anonymity, did say the governor would like in a second term to hold schools accountable for student dropouts, continue to expand vocational education and make campuses more transparent to the public.

“You can find more information shopping for a car than you can shopping for a school,” Schwarzenegger often says.

Too bad he didn’t say more things like that in the debate.

Rather than two minutes on education, the candidates should have been required to spend 20. It might have enlightened voters and certainly would have forced the candidates to think more about how to better spend the taxpayers’ billions.

*

George Skelton writes Monday and Thursday. Reach him at george.skelton@latimes.com.