Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: THURSDAY, November 2, 1995 TAG: 9511020054
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A-13 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE:
DATELINE: LENGTH: Long
A recent column referred to the VEA as a "wholly owned subsidiary" of the Democratic Party. That came under the heading of making a point by exaggeration. But it drew a stern rebuke from Gary Waldo, who ably heads the VEA's regional office in Roanoke. He pointed out, quite correctly, that Republican candidates, including me, have received his organization's endorsement.
Waldo ventured onto the shakier ground of memory in recalling the VEA's attitude toward my inadequate run for Congress in 1984. In his version, they appreciated my support for education in the state legislature, but couldn't endorse me because the incumbent Democrat, Rep. Jim Olin, was too good a friend. That isn't exactly the way it happened.
For a candidate to be considered, he or she must normally complete a VEA questionnaire and appear for a personal interview before the committee charged with making a recommendation. Its choice may or may not be greeted with enthusiasm by bigger wigs in Richmond or Washington, but it's generally given due deference.
In approaching the 1984 campaign, I spoke with the chairman of the VEA's political committee for the 6th Congressional District. My message was simple: "I would like your endorsement if there's any chance I can get it." There was a practical reason for that. A questionnaire represents a written commitment to support or oppose important issues of policy. To be crass, why give away anything to those whose backing you cannot obtain?
I was told, in words to this effect, "We've had problems communicating with Olin and are genuinely interested in considering your candidacy." With eloquence born of desperation, I sang my usual song about it being in the VEA's interest to back those Republicans with whom it could find common ground.
Satisfied with my pitch but still disbelieving the chance of an endorsement, I was surprised to learn the committee had voted to endorse me. A short time later, that was set aside, by whose intervention I can't say.
This is no case of a pure soul martyred for truth, and you can make a good argument the VEA/NEA was right to stick with a Democratic congressional majority that then seemed as enduring as the tides. Political-action committees must look to power in the aggregate.
So, is Waldo right when he implies the VEA is perfectly open to endorsing Republicans? Well, in the 1995 campaign, V-PAC backed 27 candidates for the state Senate and 79 for the House of Delegates. Of those 106 candidates, 87 were Democrats. But 10 of 19 GOP candidates endorsed either were unopposed or had no Democratic opponent.
That isn't to say there aren't some surprises on the VEA list. In closely contested Senate races, V-PAC endorsed two GOP incumbents, Sens. Frederick Quayle of Chesapeake and Robert Calhoun of Alexandria. But while V-PAC endorsed numerous Democratic challengers to incumbent Republicans, it failed to endorse a single GOP challenger, even for an open seat. Ditto for federal elections, only more so.
This information wasn't pulled from a hat but obtained in a lengthy interview with Dick Pulley, the VEA's top political operative and one of the smartest men ever to lobby the legislature. V-PAC will give about $100,000 to legislative candidates this year.
A recent statement here that Virginia now spends $7,000 on each student in the public schools drew fire from another teacher. "It's just not true," he said, maybe in Northern Virginia. But it has "no bearing whatsoever" on average per-pupil expenditure in Southwest Virginia, which is "more nearly half" the figure cited.
In truth, the figure is my own estimate; it has to be. Official data for 1995-96 won't be published by the state until about 12 months after the end of the school year. In fact, data for 1994-95 won't be available until next summer. Still, the figure wasn't pulled from my hat. It was based on a reasonable extension of the latest available published data - for the 1993-94 school year.
On Page 34 of the report for 1993-94, you will find that all Virginia school divisions that year spent $6,648,953,545.89. This includes, of course, spending for debt service and improvements to physical plant that teachers might like to exclude. On Page 8, you'll find the schools enrolled 1,025,396 students. Dividing total spending of $6.6 billion by total students will give you an average, statewide, per-pupil expenditure of almost $6,500.
The figure of $7,000 for the current year assumes an increase of 4 percent last year and this. Unofficial, but not unreasonable. In the four years from 1989-90 to 1993-94, which included a recession and Gov. Wilder's austerity, spending on public schools in Virginia still increased by 20 percent.
As far as per-pupil spending outside Northern Virginia being "more nearly half" of $7,000, the cities of Roanoke and Bristol spent almost that much two years ago! More typical rural counties and small cities in Southwest and Southside Virginia now spend in the range of $6,000 per student.
Frankly, I don't know the proper amount. But educators have an obvious conflict of interest in telling us we ought to spend more. They might have the courtesy to say (or at least know) what we are spending. But relying on emotion instead of fact, I do believe they've won this debate.
Ray L. Garland is a Roanoke Times columnist.
by CNB