The eight Democrats and five Republicans on the Legislature’s Appropriations Committee got together this week to compromise on a bond question for the fall and instead voted 8 to 5 for the Democratic version, suggesting that their compromising skills were a bit rusty. But lawmakers will have another chance next week to come to two-thirds’ agreement on a package and plenty of opportunity to make both sides happy.

The bond as passed by the committee would spend $60.8 million on transportation, including $5 million to help with work on the Waldo-Hancock Bridge, send $25.5 million to higher education, with Maine’s new community colleges deservedly receiving nearly half of that and spend $7.5 million on environmental programs – drinking water, hazardous waste, overboard discharge – of the sort municipalities routinely must improve. The two parties were not far apart on what they were willing to spend, with the GOP looking to invest less in the University of Maine System and on the school renovation fund because they say, and many in state government agree, that its repayment method needs reform.

But fixing the way the revolving loan fund is replenished needn’t stand in the way of allowing more schools to use it. Lawmakers can do both. And Maine needs to make a far larger investment in its university system to come even close to catching up with other states. Republicans properly are concerned with the overall cost of the bond package but they have already won a significant point by persuading Democrats to push their $5 million request for parks off until spring when it may be paired with a Land for Maine’s Future bond.

Republicans should win on another issue, as well. Democrats want the bond package to be presented as one question; Republicans want four separate questions, with the requests divided among transportation, education, environment and several million dollars for LifeFlight helicopter rescue services for hospitals. If the bond were a single question, it would pass – there are too many people who would understand its many necessary investments to do otherwise. But the Republicans have an excellent point. In recent years, bond questions have become catchalls for worthy and not-so-worthy programs, with voters stuck having the choice of voting against an entire bond because they did not approve a section of it or supporting an expenditure they would rather not.

Breaking the bond into four pieces is reasonable and what Maine has traditionally done. Gov. John Baldacci said he would support the division and there is no reason that Democratic lawmakers should not too.

It may not be the monetary compromise the GOP wanted, but it would give voters the chance to look at each of the broad categories and decide for themselves where the state should spend their money.