I am embarrassed to admit it, but Howard Denis is my state senator.

He doesn't like the Linowes Commission report, because it proposes taking resources out of Montgomery County {op-ed, Dec. 6}. That's exactly what is proposed, and in the long run, the state of Maryland and Montgomery County will be better places to live if the proposal is implemented.

To simplify the discussion, let's focus on only one function of state and local government: education. Most observers, including perhaps even Mr. Denis, would agree that good public schools are vital to ensuring the economic future of our children as individuals and our nation as a leader in the global economy. Most observers would also agree that a necessary (though not sufficient) condition for achieving good public schools is money.

At its most elementary, the Linowes Commission is proposing that the state give the poorest jurisdictions more money so that their school systems can be improved. Without such funding orchestrated by the state government, Maryland's poorest school districts will never be able to match the Montgomery County quality of which Mr. Denis and I are justly so proud.

Of course, implementation of this proposal is going to mean somewhat higher taxes for the state's wealthier jurisdictions (including the district that Mr. Denis represents and in which I live). By definition, that's what progressive taxation is all about. But is this investment worth the cost?

If we take a long-range view, the answer is clearly yes. Such an investment will make Maryland a richer and more secure place for me and my children. Improving the educational opportunities for the children of Baltimore City and Caroline County will not endanger the citizens of Montgomery County; on the contrary, not adequately financing the inner-city and Eastern Shore schools will ultimately result in severe costs to Montgomery County.

It's OK to be selfish, Mr. Denis. Just don't be so shortsighted. DAVID W. SEARS Bethesda