One result of all the nonsense spewing from the nonstop assault of political ads on the airwaves and, increasingly, over the home phone at dinnertime, is a devaluation of campaign discourse. Ironically, the more money that is spent in shaping political messages in the run-up to an election, the cheaper political talk seems to be. What we get are alternating visions of political hell and damnation or Pollyanna riding a unicorn, and we eventually conclude that those who “approve this message” are not really men and women of their word. The silver lining to this sad state of political extremes is that voters quickly learn to value actions over words. And nowhere is action needed more than in Connecticut’s struggle to adequately fund public education.

Connecticut’s education budget will have a $270 million hole in it when federal stimulus money dries up next year. Even without the shortfall, there would have been only enough money to fund a diminishing state commitment to education. Back when the state instituted Educational Cost Sharing grants in 1988 to address the disparity in school funding between wealthy and poor towns, the funding plan was described as a 50-50 educational partnership between the state and towns. State ECS and special education funding never quiet achieved the 50 percent share of local education costs, however, and declines in the past several years have shrunk the state’s end of that “partnership” to 37.8 percent statewide — and closer to a one-third share in Newtown. On top of that, the state has added layers of unfunded mandates for the towns to pay for everything from Americans With Disabilities Act compliance to Vo-Ag school tuition and transportation costs.

So when the major candidates for Connecticut’s top elected offices vow to make education a priority in the coming years by covering a $270 million shortfall with various logrolling tactics and legislative legerdemain, the promise rings hollow for property taxpayers in towns and cities clinging to the ever-shorter end of the stick in this failing partnership with the state. A ringing endorsement of the status quo is somehow passing for progress on the state level this year. Such is the power of words.

The kinds of actions that will feel like progress to the struggling property taxpayers in Connecticut’s towns and cities will require more than experimenting with merit pay for teachers, or charter and magnet schools, which are the topics-du-jour on the campaign trail. These experiments, along with the school reforms enacted by the legislature in its failed attempt to secure $195 million in federal Race to the Top funding this summer, are likely to add to the expense of education in Connecticut. Increasingly, that means an increase in the local property tax rate, or a reduction in other essential town services, or both.

What is needed is a structural change in the way the state funds education, and in all likelihood it will mean new state taxes, which explains why no one seems to be talking about it on the campaign trail. (One of the modern marvels of state-of-the-art political marketing is that you can hide an 800-pound gorilla behind a unicorn.) But Connecticut’s voters are sophisticated enough to know that when it comes to funding education, they will be asked to pay for it either in their state tax return or in their property tax bill. It would be nice if the state could sort out its role in this frayed educational partnership in a context of responsibility rather than electability… actions rather than words.