FAIRBANKS -- Some Republicans in the Alaska Legislature who want to overturn the constitutional ban on spending public money for private schools continue to promote the fiction that this is no time to talk about the cost.

Amend the Constitution first and then we will talk about the money, they say.

It's easy enough to see through this strategy, which has been embraced by Gov. Sean Parnell and the GOP leaders of the Legislature for public relations purposes.

Pretending that the amendment is simply a matter of philosophy with no cost to the state or the public schools in Alaska would make it easier to sell to the voters in November.

The so-called "fiscal note" attached to the proposed amendment says it would cost $1,500 to include a statement in the election pamphlet. If the measure requires that the state use a larger ballot, the cost would be $22,000.

Alaskans deserve a real explanation about the financial consequences of what would be the most significant change in educational policy since Alaska entered the union.

But acknowledging that the cost could be $60 million or $100 million would make it impossible to even get this plan out of the Legislature, where a two-thirds majority is needed. A recent legislative research report found that if students now in private school received the same funding allocated to public schools, the cost to the state would rise $100 million. Others say the increase would be $40 million less.

The Legislature is in the mood for budget cuts, not increases, so neither number is likely to win favor.

The Republican backers say it's impossible to talk about cost because they have no idea how much public money would go to private schools. They haven't got a clue, they will tell you, but don't worry; they'll figure it out as soon as the voters give them the go-ahead.

GOP Sen. Mike Dunleavy of Wasilla, one of the chief backers of the measure, said the $100 million assertion was one of the "extreme possibilities" put forward by opponents, but he offered no cost figure of his own.

"Nothing's going to happen until a program is developed," he said.

They won't even guess at the cost of a program because the constitution does not allow it yet, so the subject is irrelevant, they say.

This is the weakest argument I've ever heard about separating philosophy from policy, which is no more possible than taking the wet out of water. It's a political tactic and an excuse for not doing the work the Legislature is called upon to perform.

"We don't need to worry too much about how it's going to work or if it's going to work," Sen. Kevin Meyer, the co-chairman of the Senate Finance Committee told the public Monday night about the amendment. "The question's whether or not to let people vote on it."

That's a convenient dodge, but please drop the telemarketing techniques and be honest with Alaskans.

The time to consider how this would work and whether it would work is now, not later. To suggest that these matters cannot be discussed concurrently is an insult.

A year ago, Senate leaders decided that the amendment should not be analyzed in the Senate Education Committee because Kodiak GOP Sen. Gary Stevens, the committee chairman, was not a convert.

Sen. Charlie Huggins yanked the measure from the education committee, concocting the claim that the education amendment was not an education issue. Sen. John Coghill, who subscribes to the same school of thought, agreed that it was not about education, but was "inherently a finance question."

I agree with Coghill that it is inherently a finance question about education, which is why the Legislature should not be afraid to discuss the finance question.

"No money shall be paid from public funds for the direct benefit of any religious or other private educational institution," the Alaska Constitution declares. The governor and GOP legislators trying to repeal that sentence are doing all they can to skip the most important and divisive question about education in Alaska these days -- how to pay for it.