Hillary Clinton is not the only liberal pitching Universal Pre-K, although she is the most prominent proponent of it. Here in the Garden State our governor, another multi-millionaire unaffected by such trivialities as having to decide between pay the heating bill or buying food, is looking at spending more taxpayer funds to set up a system of universal pre-K in NJ.
And this despite the fact that in the 31 specially funded school districts studies have conclusively proved that there is no benefit to pre-K, to the contrary, there is anecdotal evidence it may associated with behavioral problems. In a majority of reports surveys show a marked increase in socialization and certain skills in the first years of public schools (K, 1 and 2). What is often not reported is that by grade 2 or 3 most non-pre-K students have surpassed the pre-K students on many of the levels used to evaluate the students.
Private day care and pre-K schools are a growing phenomenon across the country, with many of the employees of these establishments working with the title of teacher and even getting certified in kindergarten and pre-K education. These establishments not only pay taxes on tuition but also the mandatory payroll taxes for the thousands of people being employed by them.
So why would the government want to shut off a veritable fountain of cash in the way of taxes generated by private pre-schools and force people to use the "free" government pre-K? Well, that answer can be summed up in one word... the NEA.
The National Education Association wants to force mandatory... um, I mean Universal pre-k on the taxpayers of each state. They are doing so by misusing data indicating the benefits of pre-K and spreading horror stories about children being left unattended while their parents (usually a single mom) works. The main benefit (to the NEA) is that it forces schools to hire more (union) teachers to cover these classes.
Universal pre-K will be sold as an option to taxpayers, parents will be able to chose to send their children to public pre-K, private pre-K, or to not use pre-school at all. As most people send their children to public pre-K since they are paying for it anyway, private opportunities will become more limited, forcing more people into the system. And all will be well and good until more studies come out and the law changes to force parents into sending their children to pre-K.
Ask most women what their idea of the American dream is and they will not say that home ownership is the first item on their list (despite what realtors tell you)... it is to be a stay at home mother.
And on that note, can you remember about 8 to 10 years ago when Hillary was first lady and pushing government initiatives and programs to get low and moderate income families mortgages so they can live the American Dream? We see now that perhaps dangling these people in front of mortgage lenders like so many bloody steaks in front of a pack of tigers was not a good idea. As a matter of fact, when the government steps up to "solve" a problem it usually creates more problems that the one they invented in the first place.
Nowhere does anyone pitching universal pre-k mention the estimated tax revenues to start the program, not to mention how much it will cost annually. But simply hiring teachers and buying the equipment is not the biggest immdiate expense. Schools throughout the country are already in a dilemma for space because after the baby boomers graduated many boards of education sold off extra property when the student rolls contracted and after the last housing boom there are few urban or suburban tracts of land large enough to build schools. So towns will be left with limited choices, they will have to use eminent domain to seize the adequate property, buy property at market value, or convert parks to school property where available. None are good solutions, all are expensive.
And who pays for this? Us the taxpayers. All because liberals are owned by the unions even though they represent a small fraction of US citizens. Concepts such as universal pre-K sound honorable until you start peeling the onion and see the true reason behind them.
No comments:
Post a Comment