AUGUSTA – Despite a full-court press by Maine teachers, Democratic Gov. John E. Baldacci will not alter the state’s current school fingerprinting law and vowed Monday to veto any bill that does if it reaches his desk.

The determined stand by the administration was taken in the aftermath of a 9-4 vote by the Legislature’s Education Committee last Thursday in favor of LD 890, a bill that would limit fingerprinting and criminal background checks to new hires only in Maine schools.

About 80 percent of Maine’s teachers already have complied with the phased-in 1999 state law, according to Steve Crouse, a lobbyist for the Maine Education Association. He estimated there are somewhere between 3,000 and 4,000 teachers who have yet to have their prints taken. About 45 teachers, he said, have left the teaching ranks as a matter of conscience rather than submit to a law viewed by many as professionally demeaning and personally humiliating.

Many educators and school employees had been optimistic about the proposed change to the law because Baldacci said during his fall gubernatorial campaign that criminal background checks should be done only on new school employees.

“The governor supports no changes in the current law and, as we all know, during the campaign season, he had responded to every question that he would favor supporting a law for new hires only,” Crouse said. “He has clearly shifted his position and is now supporting the current law without any changes, and it appears the governor will not compromise in any shape, way or form.”

Baldacci spokesman Lee Umphrey said the governor indeed would not negotiate on LD 890 and that he will veto the measure if lawmakers in the House and Senate enact it. Acknowledging the governor had supported a new-hire revision of the law six months ago, Umphrey said Baldacci did an about-face after Education Commissioner Susan Gendron showed him how many existing or potential school employees had been discharged or not hired during the last four years.

“The governor believes that what’s best for the children of Maine is for existing law to remain the same,” Umphrey said.

Currently the results of fingerprinting and criminal history checks are given only to the Maine Department of Education, which by law can’t reveal the information to anyone, even to the individual seeking recertification. Maine legislators aren’t provided access to that information and remain suspicious of the need to fingerprint all teachers.

Realizing that legislative skepticism could prompt Republicans and Democrats to override his veto of the bill, Baldacci will support a minor change in the law to give lawmakers access to just the number and type of infractions without revealing names. Rep. Glenn Cummings, a Portland Democrat who also serves as House chairman of the Education Committee, suspected that such a minor concession may not be enough to convince legislators.

“There’s been no change in the Legislature among those of us who feel that you need to carefully balance and protect the safety of our children in our schools with a policy that respects and appreciates Maine teachers for what they’ve done,” Cummings said. “The new-hires legislation protects those two issues very well. It protects anybody who would come into our state and ask for certification and try to get access to a kid for prurient reasons. At the same time it eliminates the statewide insult against Maine teachers.”

The bill could reach the floor of the House for debate almost anytime within the next 10 days. Sen. Betty Lou Mitchell, R-Etna, said the Senate’s reception was anything but certain. Cummings said he was “within two” senators of being able to override a Baldacci veto. Two-thirds of the state representatives or senators present when a vote is taken is required to overturn a gubernatorial veto.

Mitchell, a dissenting member of the Education Committee, couldn’t understand why the majority of her panel didn’t see the issue her way.

“I’m very concerned about the 9-4 committee vote,” Mitchell said. After the education commissioner spoke to the committee, “I saw it was imperative that we keep the fingerprinting law as it is based on the information she had regarding instances in which fingerprinting and background checks have revealed that job applicants should not be employed because of prior crimes. That tells us that this is an effective law.”