January 23, 2000
Mary Cathcart
Senate District 7
Should the Fingerprinting Law Be Repealed?
A large number of educators have contacted me in the past few weeks about
the new law requiring fingerprinting for teachers and other school personnel.
I share their concerns about this law, and wanted to let the public know
why I think the law should be repealed.
As a citizen who values the right to privacy for everyone, I am disturbed by
the image of our teachers lining up to be fingerprinted. In our free society,
we ordinarily fingerprint only the ones we want to protect--e.g.,
children--or the ones we suspect of crimes. The State Bureau of
Investigation is already required to perform background checks on new
applicants, and these background checks should alert school administrators
to anyone with a criminal record. Treating the people whom we trust to
teach our children in the same way we treat those suspected of a crime places
all educators under a cloud of suspicion and disrespect. I believe this is
uncalled for.
I question the effectiveness of fingerprinting educators as a means of
protecting our children. If someone is a sex offender, there is no
assurance that he or she will have a previous record. How will
fingerprinting deter adults from predatory acts upon children? Surely the
screening of new applicants is the best way to weed out the criminals,
without treating all educators like criminals.
The fingerprinting bill was passed originally with an effective date of
July, 1996, three Legislatures ago. The idea is so problematic that it has
been delayed twice. Perhaps it should be postponed indefinitely, unless
someone can prove that it will be effective in saving our children from
sexual predators. So far, I have not seen any convincing evidence for it.
Our teachers--and other school personnel-- are underpaid already; why
should they have to come up with a $49 fee and submit to fingerprinting?
This seems to be an undue burden. Further, people in some communities will
have to travel in order to be fingerprinted; those in districts with fewer
than 100 employees will have to travel to a regional location, to make the
process more manageable for the state. We are told by the state police that
the tests cannot be administered locally because only the state police can
do it in a manner that the fingerprints will be in a nationwide computer
network.
Some schools have decided that, if their educators have to be fingerprinted,
then the school district will shoulder the cost. This is unfair, since most
schools have no funds to spare, and may have to sacrifice buying textbooks,
etc., in order to pay to fingerprint teachers. If the state deems this
measure necessary, then the state should pay for it.
Finally, the Legislature is being asked in this session to establish a
Commission to study how to attract and retain high-quality teachers. We are
already competing with
wealthier states such as Massachusetts and Connecticut, and facing a teacher
shortage, particularly in the fields of science and mathematics. Why would
Maine's best and brightest young people enter a profession that is not only
undercompensated, but requires them to be treated as guilty until proven
innocent?
The Legislature will be considering several measures this week, and we will
have to decide whether to keep this law in place and fund it, or to repeal
it. I believe we must do all we can to ensure the safety of our children,
but I do not think fingerprinting teachers is the way to do it. Putting
educators in the same category with suspected criminals will not help anyone,
in my opinion. However, if most legislators believe it is necessary to
continue the fingerprinting, I pledge to fight for state funding; it is not
fair to ask our teachers, or our local schools, to subsidize the
fingerprinting.
Please feel free to contact me if you wish to discuss this, or any other
issues coming before the Legislature this session, further. I am always
appreciative of your opinions. I can be reached during the session in
Augusta, at 287-1515; toll-free messages, 1-800-423-6900.