As expected, the first debate in the Pennsylvania governor’s race focused on taxes, education spending and the overall financial health of the state. Monday night’s debate featured the often repeated claim by Democrat Tom Wolf that Gov. Tom Corbett has cut education funding. Corbett, the Republican incumbent, claims that education spending in Pennsylavania has actually increased and is at a historic high.

Sorting out the claims and counterclaims requires some digging.

The political website factcheck.org featured an article in June referring to the conflicting statements by the Corbett and Wolf campaigns titled “Playing politics with education.” Factcheck’s summary focsuses on two important issues in the education funding debate — the impact of federal stimulus money and contributions to the state pension fund for teachers and school employees.

Exploring these two issues helps explain both Corbett’s claim that education funding in Pennsylania has increased during his term and the Wolf promise to restore “Corbett’s $1 billion in cuts to education.”

Federal stimulus money replaced some state education spending — about $654 million — in each of two years.

When the stimulus money flowed from Washington, school districts got more funding, but the state’s share of that money was reduced.

Another fact that’s important to understand when it comes to the education funding debate is that an increasing percentage of total education spending goes to school employee pension funds, which are underfunded by $40 billion. The factcheck.org analysis found that “while more money was going toward education, less was making its way to the classrooms.”

These facts mean that Corbett and Wolf are both technically correct — at least in their carefully worded claims that on the surface seem contradictory.

Factcheck’s analysis goes on to report that Pennslvania’s per-pupil spending ($12,240 in 2012) ranks 13th in the United States, where the national per-pupil average is $10,608. But a breakdown of that spending shows that state money going to students in the classroom puts the state in the 21st spot nationally. To make up for that, local taxpayers are contributing more, with local sources of money for education putting Pennsylvania 6th nationally.

Overall, the state’s contribution to public education covers 36 percent of total spending, which is below the national average of 45 percent. This lower level of state spending puts Pennsylvania in the 45th position, which results in the greater burden on local taxpayers.

This trend did not start with Corbett; the state’s contribution has been slipping for years, thanks to Harrisburg politicians from both parties.

The factcheck.org summary notes that Pennsylvania is near the top when it comes to per-pupil spending for public education, but that boast is made possible by a heavier contribution from local property tax payers to replace state tax dollars that are well-below the national average and have fallen for a decade or more.

Education funding is a legitmate topic for debate in the governor’s contest. But voters and taxpayers should know the truth, not just the sound bites tossed out by both candidates.

To better server voters, Corbett and Wolf should talk about their views on the state’s below-average contribution to K-12 public education. They should explain what they would do, if anything.

Is Corbett satisfied with the state’s level of funding reaching the classroom, even if it puts an extra burden on local taxpayers?

If Wolf wants to increase that spending, will he raise taxes or shift priorities and cut spending elsewhere? Wolf supports an extraction tax of Marcellus shale gas extraction. Would he target that money for education or the general fund?

Would Wolf use some of the extraction tax money to help close the $50 billion gap in the state’s two big public employee pension funds?

While on the issue of the $50 billion underfunding of the two big public employee pensions, both candidates should explain their views. Corbett supports reforms to reduce future costs, but the funding gap would still be huge.

Wolf calls the $50 billion funding gap a “problem” and not a “crisis.” Voters and taxpayers should know what he would do about the $50 billion “problem” and when he might consider it a crisis — a $100 billion funding gap, perhaps?