Skip to comments.Yet Another Pre-School Program?
Posted on 03/29/2014 1:24:43 PM PDT by Kaslin
When some people hear that the president has proposed a new federally funded pre-school program, they might think, Great idea. Its about time!
But theyd say this, surely, because theyre unaware that Washington is already running pre-school programs. Not just one or two, in fact, but 45 early learning and child-care initiatives. And no fewer than 12 of them are explicitly designed to provide early childhood education. The rest, however, also allow funds to be used for that purpose.
So if the federal government is already bankrolling -- excuse me, if you and I and other taxpayers are already bankrolling -- close to four dozen such programs right now, why do we need another one? Especially one that would cost $75 billion over the next 10 years?
This despite the fact that more than three-quarters of the nations four-year-olds are already enrolled in some form of early education and care.
The presidents pre-school initiative, part of his fiscal year 2015 budget proposal, is supposed to expand access to high quality preschool for every 4-year-old child in the country. And there are legislative proposals in the House and Senate that would do the same.
What need would this initiative fulfill that isnt now being addressed by one of the following programs?
· Head Start. This flagship pre-school federal program is probably the most well-known. Taxpayers have spent more than $180 billion on Head Start since 1965; it costs $8 billion a year. Yet an evaluation by governments own Department of Health and Human Services shows little to no effect on cognitive, social-emotional, health, or parenting outcomes on the participating children. Talk about a bad return on your investment. Head Start is also rife with fraud and abuse, with staff misreporting income to enroll more students.
· Temporary Assistance for Needy Families. TANF provides federal funds to states for a variety of welfare programs, including child care funding. During FY 2012, $2.6 billion in TANF spending was for child care programs.
· Social Services Block Grant. Established in 1981, the SSBG provides $1.7 billion to states for child care, health care, and other social services. In FY 2009 (the most recent year for which data are available), 14 percent of SSBG expenditures (including allowed TANF transfers) were for subsidized child care.
· Child Care Development Fund. The CCDFwas funded at $5.2 billion in FY 2012 with approximately 1.7 million children receiving subsidized care. In addition, states can use up to 30 percent of their Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) funds for CCDF purposes.
And this is on top of the many state-run pre-school programs out there. Forty states and the District of Columbia provide subsidized pre-school at the state level.
The list goes on and on (Heritage Foundation education experts Lindsey Burke and Rachel Sheffield have a complete list in their latest paper), but you get the idea.
Moreover, they write, a large majority of mothers indicate that they prefer to stay home when their children are in their most formative years (up to age four); 80 percent of mothers who work part-time indicate that is the ideal scenario for them.
If federal policymakers want to help, rather than create a new program, they should try reforming the many that theyre already running. There are wasted funds and poor results to spare, so they should have plenty to do.
Weve all heard jokes about the Department of Redundancy Department, but when youre handed a real-life example like this, its not funny anymore. Anyone who thinks we need a 46th federal pre-school program is in need of some serious remedial education.
We have at least 75% (if not more) pre-school aged children in SOME kind of day-care, preschool 'program' for at least 2 years, and you want to add ANOTHER year ?
Shouldn't reasonable people expect a functioning, intelligent citizen/voter in (already) 14 years and you want to make it 15?
What're ya' smokin', crack ?
Parents - The ONLY effective “Pre-School” Program.
“What good fortune for the state that people do not think!”
Adolph Hitler 1933
When an opponent declares, I will not come over to your side, I calmly say, Your child belongs to us already... What are you? You will pass on. Your descendants, however, now stand in the new camp. In a short time they will know nothing else but this new community.”
Adolph Hitler Speech November 1933
Might as well just hand over all children at birth to be raised by incompetent government workers so they drones can increase their numbers...
Here in Tucson I saw an ad on satellite TV slickly done touting the “Great Advantages” of Common Core. It was subtexted as being paid for by the Government. They know no limits.
It would be VERY interesting to determine the effectiveness of said programs. If the programs are run by affirmative action employees, its another waste of gubmint funds.
I'm sympathetic to the author's opinion, but that statistic strikes me as false.
Then you need a red marker to correct the text:
It was subtexted as being paid for by the TAXPAYERS.
Well; that won't work to swell on yer TV' but it works REALLY good in a newspaper you've marked up and left behind in a restaurant for the next reader to peruse...
taxpayer baby sitting service so the young tramps can go out and get pregnant again, you dont think they’re out working do you?
Pre-K is just another way of saying, "Let's feed all the illegal alien and illegitimate spawn." And there are already waaay too many of both in NYC. The results of Pre-K programs is decidedly mixed, with Head-Start being a dismal failure. It also provides more time for the government to indoctrinate little minds.
“Let’s feed all the illegal alien and illegitimate spawn.”
More high-paying jobs for Sociology, Education, and Women's Studies majors.
I see the appalling lack of resources in schools every day. Xerox paper is often so scarce that teachers have to buy their own or pay for copying outside of school. School libraries are either closed for lack of funds for a librarian or have sparse collections of patched up books. Kids in classes whose teachers were the slightest bit tardy in submitting their requests for textbooks often get the 10 year old dog-eared textbooks left in some dusty corner of a bookroom. Way too many lab activities are "paper labs" instead of a chance to manipulate lab equipment and experience phenomena that physically happen in the lab (like a change in color or something that fizzes). But...nowadays, most classrooms have SmartBoards and/or laptops for the kids. The former things I mentioned are so much more important than these last things, yet are now stretched to the limit.
While there are many worthy online activities for students which would justify the laptops, I also constantly see kids opening multiple windows on the computers during class. They are filling their MP3 devices from the laptops, looking at movies, watching clips of sports events, and admiring pages of high-dollar sneakers (?!) when they are supposed to be answering questions on various academic websites. Your tax dollars at work.
Why isn't it a REQUIREMENT?
Are there THAT many JW's in your classes??
The folks who are making the decisions to BUY the new toys are the same ones who did NOT enjoy using the old equipment!
Why are these URL's not blocked out?
Surely there exists a program that could suck out ALL the websites visited in a day, chug thru them at night, and the next morning present a list of those to a HUMAN who could then put the bad ones on a permanent lockout list.
Quit wincing and Take Control!
Remind them, gently, that THIS is the country you are now living in; enjoying the fruits of the land.