Civil disagreements, with Lynne Varner and Bruce Ramsey of the Seattle Times editorial board, is a weekly feature of the Ed Cetera blog. Here Bruce and Lynne argue about who should get the million dollars a Georgia politician won on a game show.

Lynne Varner, left, and Bruce Ramsey

Lynne Varner: Bruce, have you seen the hit television game show, “Are you Smarter than a 5th Grader?” I confess I haven't but one doesn't need to outhink a fifth grader to disagree with creditors vying for the winnings of a recent contestant on the show.

This story recounts how Georgia
State School Superintendent Kathy Cox went on the show, won $1 million and pledged the winnings to three state-run schools for the deaf. Months later, Cox and her husband filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy protection and a bankruptcy trustee wants the game show winnings to pay creditors.

I agree with Georgia's attorney general who argues that the money was earmarked for the schools before the bankruptcy and ought to still go there.

Legally, the creditors likely have a right to the cash. But ethically, they're stooping lower than a lawyer hovering around an emergency room. (In advance of howls of protests, I am NOT calling all lawyers ambulance chasers.) Adults ought to know something fifth graders will eventually learn, just because you can do something doesn't mean you should. Facilities for special needs kids are being cut to the bone; snatching a charitable contribution away from them adds insult to injury.

There are larger implications here. Should charitable organizations involved in celebrity tournaments look over their shoulders for the credit man before claiming winnings? Could money a person setaside for religious tithing be confiscated? Some sensibility of the intent of the money ought to be applied along with bankruptcy and credit law. Don't you think, Bruce?

Bruce Ramsey replies: Of course not. (We're supposed to disagree here, right?) Lynne, she should pay the money to her creditors, because she owes money to them. She doesn't owe money to the school for the deaf. She has promised to give them some money, but that's not the same as owing. You can't give what you don't have.

Here's what's happening. You've got a public figure who goes on national TV, wins a million bucks, and promises her winnings to some schools for the deaf. That's all very nice. It makes her feel good about herself. She's also an elected official (Republican) and the thought might have crossed her mind that donating a million bucks would look good with the voters of Georgia.

She was also part of a marriage. She and her husband owned a home-building enterprise. They undertook obligations--to workers, subcontractors, suppliers, governments, etc.--and are short of meeting those obligations by $3.5 million. What do she and her husband do? They file for Chapter 7, which is a device for not having to pay your bills, for weaseling out, and saying, sorry, that's all there is, you don't get any more. Sometimes people have to do that when they don't have any money. But here the attorney for the creditors says, Hey, wait a minute! What about that million bucks you won on TV? And our state superintendent of schools says, Oh, I promised that to the deaf.

Well, sorry, but she's not in a position to promise that money. Donations come out of surplus, extra money, savings. She doesn't have any of that. She owes the million bucks to the people who advanced land, labor, capital, materials and services to her family business.