The re-election of Sam Brownback for another four years as Kansas governor brought smiles to the faces of many of Tuesday’s voters but frowns and extreme disappointment to many engaged in the business of education.

One of the biggest issues in the gubernatorial election was how education had fared in terms of state financial support over the last four years.

As has been pointed out over the years, numbers can be selected and presented in a manner that supports about any political position. This certainly is true in the ongoing education funding controversy, with Brownback supporters pointing to one set of figures that shows an increase in state funding for K-12 education while others point to another set of figures that indicate cuts in direct in-class instruction spending.

This isn’t the case with higher education, including Kansas University. State support now accounts for only 17 percent of the operating budget for KU’s Lawrence campus and 30 percent for the KU Medical Center. That’s 21 percent overall for both campuses.

Granted, dollars are tight. Kansas isn’t the only state where governors have had to be careful or shrewd in how they handle the purse strings for K-12 and higher education.

Reductions in revenue will pose a major challenge for Brownback as he prepares his upcoming budget for the state. His critics suggest he will propose significant cuts in education funding or shift more responsibility for K-12 funding onto local property taxes. Some say he could call for state tax increases to fund education, however, that is highly unlikely.

Brownback has a target on his back in the eyes of those concerned about the quality of education in Kansas. He also has to balance the budget.

Rather than seeking overall funding increases to cover the general needs of state universities, the governor might be better off identifying specific pressing needs and opportunities at the various state-supported schools — specific programs that have the potential to provide a relatively quick economic payoff for the state and the university. These would be targeted funds to meet particular needs or opportunities for the state to enjoy economic benefits.

Several examples:

l $5 million a year for the Drug and Vaccine Discovery Institute on Mount Oread. This would bring instant research dollars to KU and Kansas and help retain the services and talents of a highly skilled researcher currently being courted by other major universities.

l Faculty members at the KU Medical Center have gone seven years without a general salary increase. There have been merit increases, but no general increases at a school that is being asked to produce more doctors while struggling to hire new staff and retain the current staff needed to accomplish this goal.

l Kansas needs to attract new business, which, in turn would produce added tax revenue for the state. There is a need, as well as an opportunity, to expand and develop KU’s Innovation Way for science, engineering and pharmacy. This calls for $7 million a year and, if successful, would result in immediate payoffs for the university and the state.

l The state wants and needs more doctors, and one of the best ways to achieve this goal is to expand and stabilize the KU School of Medicine in Wichita. University officials say they need $4.9 million a year to initiate this effort.

All these programs cost money, but each of them provides the means to meet immediate needs and, at the same time, provide economic benefits for the state, while also strengthening the university and elevating its excellence.

Brownback needs to do something to demonstrate he is genuinely committed to doing what he can to support education — some action, not just nice-sounding talk. He needs to demonstrate he wants and will fight for a strong, better-than-average system of education at all levels.

Likewise, those in the business of education need to do what they can to convince taxpayers they are getting the best possible bang out of every tax dollar earmarked for education.

Also, the Kansas Board of Regents needs to demand superior leadership at the schools they oversee and make sure their recommendations for fiscal support are based on thorough and demanding examination.

Targeted funding would help the university and, if the projects are indeed sound, the public would see positive results.

There are drawbacks in such a plan because it isn’t possible to target all the favorite or special projects at every state university. Most every dean, president or chancellor understandably thinks his or her program deserves special recognition, but there aren’t enough dollars to fund all the special programs along with the general funding for the schools. Regents would need to assess the entire system, year by year, and determine priorities among the schools.

This places added importance on the governor appointing outstanding individuals to the Board of Regents rather than using those appointments as payoffs for political favors.

Education is big business — huge. It’s huge in its importance to young men and women and the state, the money required to operate a superior system and the number of men and women responsible for educating the state’s young people. Brownback, state legislators, regents, university administrators and Kansas taxpayers have been presented an opportunity to demonstrate the importance and priority they attach to Kansas being a true leader in the business of education.