The state education establishment is all aflutter over our new governor's budget proposals. As part of a plan outlined last week by Gov. Jim Gibbons, K-12 spending will increase 17 percent over the next two years, but the percentage of the overall general fund devoted to elementary and secondary education will fall slightly.

Under the new math practiced by the state teachers union, this represents a "cut." Is it any wonder that so many Nevada students struggle with basic numerical concepts?

At any rate, a recent union news release urges the governor to provide answers to various budget queries, including the following:

"The amount of money (Gov.) Gibbons is allocating to education is at least $53 million less than the proposed Guinn budget. Why the decrease? ...

"Why is Gov. Gibbons proposing to cut over $22 million for 'innovation and remediation' ...

"The governor, as far as we can see, has completely ignored any of the recommendations of the recent study that investigated the adequacy of school financing in Nevada. ... Why?"

You get the picture.

"Parents and educators deserve answers to these questions," says Terry Hickman, executive director of the Nevada State Education Association. "For the past four years Gov. Gibbons has led the charge for 'Education First.' That shouldn't mean education is the first budget to get cut."

There's that new math, again.

In fact, Gov. Gibbons should certainly do his darnedest to adequately explain his education budget to lawmakers, parents, teachers union officials and anybody else who is interested. The success or failure of his proposals -- including his controversial school "empowerment" plan -- likely depends upon it.

In turn, we hope the inquisitive folks at the NSEA won't mind answering a few questions themselves about education spending:

-- If the governor followed "the recommendations of the recent study that investigated the adequacy of school funding in Nevada" and proposed the state spend an additional $1 billion on K-12 education over the next few years, what could the union guarantee that taxpayers would receive in return? Anything?

-- If the Holy Grail of all-day kindergarten were implemented throughout the state tomorrow, can the union assure parents that their children -- on average -- will be reading, writing and calculating at above-average (or even average) levels during their elementary school years?

-- If the state needs to pad "remediation" funding, is it because kids are being passed from grade to grade even if they haven't acquired the skills necessary to be successful at the next level? Why is this?

-- If state taxpayers met every funding request on the union wish list, would we see fewer high school seniors failing the proficiency exam -- or fewer Millennium Scholars in need of remedial math or English classes when they attend state colleges? If not, what should be the consequences for the current system?

-- What, if anything, should be done to identify and reward the many good teachers and weed out the slackers?

-- Define "accountability."

We're waiting.