Fingerprint compromise

The new opposition by the Maine Education Association to fingerprinting teachers and other school staff provides the state with a chance to revisit this issue and, this time, fully debate it. A compromise amendment already may be at hand.

What is offensive about the proposed law is that is was passed, as an unfunded mandate, without evidence of a problem. In fact, the evidence points toward schools being safer places than just about anywhere else. The fact lawmakers thought they could simply push the cost of the background and fingerprinting checks onto school staffs added financial injury to insult. Gov. Angus King defends the idea of the background checks because, he says, 34 other states have them, and the child molesters from those states could be driven from there to here. Some data on this phenomenon would be helpful, but even if that were true, it would not explain why Maine would do checks on its current teachers — for whom there is no outbreak of reports of malfeasance. But it does point to a compromise.

If the Department of Education can demonstrate that there is indeed a problem with peripatetic pedophiles, the solution is to test new hires only. The change would show respect for the teachers Maine already has and would give fair warning to the teachers it might have in the future. As a show of goodwill and to avoid an unfunded mandate, the state also should pay for the first-time fingerprinting and background checks.

It has been pointed out repeatedly that a lot of people are required to submit to background checks as part of their employment, so school-staff members have nothing to complain about. But there is a difference between knowing before you accept a job that a check will be performed and learning that you are not entirely trusted after 10 or 20 years of work. And there is a difference between an employer being able to point to a good reason for doing a check and politicians who simply sensed it was a good idea.

People who oppose the fingerprinting and background checks understandably are displeased by a Legislature that passed a law without more consideration. But the truth is that just about everybody missed this one — lawmakers and education lobbyists alike. It is pointless to blame anyone now. But with a strong bipartisan commitment to amending what currently is an unpopular and unnecessary law, an exemption for current staff may be an answer that satisfies all sides.