Did you go to preschool? When I was growing up, few kids did. But now there is a new movement that says every child in America should have a chance to start school before kindergarten — at taxpayer expense.
It's part of President Obama's massive spending plans. His "stimulus" bill includes an Early Learning Challenge Grant to encourage states to "Develop a cutting-edge plan to raise the quality of your early learning programs" (http://tinyurl.com/cv6s23). It's a popular idea. Sixty-seven percent of Americans favor universal pre-K funded by the government. But I doubt that most Americans have thought it through.
Mia Levi has. She told me, "This whole thing is a scam."
Levi runs six preschools. I thought she'd favor the program, since she'd collect easy money from the government.
"I don't want to have to answer to the government," she said in my ABC special "Bailouts and Bull" (http://tinyurl.com/c9yhgr). "Our programs are so far superior."
Universal pre-K would create a single standard for preschools, but why is that a good thing? Why should we think there is one way to do preschool and that government experts know what it is? President Obama doesn't acknowledge what Nobel economist F. A. Hayek taught us: Competition is a discovery process.
Levi has to work hard to improve her schools because she knows that, unlike with government services, parents have options.
"If we didn't do our job, families would go down the street to the next school. Public schools aren't doing their job, and they get to just keep opening their doors. To say that they are the ones to define ... quality is laughable."
As she says, the pre-K movement has the whiff of scam about it. Most American kids already attend preschool. Parents pay for it themselves, and those who can't afford it can get government subsidies or use free programs like Head Start. But under universal pre-K, taxpayers would pay for every child.
"It's a flagrant waste of money," Levi said.
"It's as if I went shopping for myself because I needed a dress for a party and I bought a dress for everybody else whether they needed it or not."
But we keep hearing that investment in pre-K will pay off later. Obama says, "For every dollar we invest in these programs, we get nearly $10 back in reduced welfare rolls, fewer health costs and less crime."
Those glowing statistics come from tiny studies (58 children) of places like Michigan's Perry Preschool. But those low-income, low-IQ kids got much more than preschool, including after-school tutoring, and their moms and dads got parenting classes.
Lisa Snell, education director of the Reason Foundation, says you can't expect similar results with middle- and higher income children.
In addition, lots of studies say the preschool effect fades. Head Start is revered for raising test scores, but studies show that by grades 3 or 4 those gains vanish.
"They can't tell the difference between the kids that went to Head Start and the kids who didn't," Snell says. "When they compared them to the kids that are disadvantaged that didn't go to Head Start, they can't tell from their test scores which kids had the treatment of Head Start."
There's still another flaw in the program. Some studies have found that too much school may lead to disruptive and aggressive behavior. Libby Doggett, who leads one of the biggest pre-K advocacy groups, concedes that, but claims that "high-quality" government programs benefit children. She said Oklahoma and Georgia have them already.
But those states, despite spending billions of tax dollars on preschool for the past 10 years, have not shown impressive results. Oklahoma's students lost ground to kids from other states.
Doggett replied: "We don't want to just focus on IQ scores. We want to look at how children are doing in their social and emotional, their non-cognitive development."
Please. When the huge government program fails to raise scores, the central planners promise it will help the kids socially?
Give me a break.
John Stossel is co-anchor of ABC News' "20/20" and the author of "Myth, Lies, and Downright Stupidity." To find out more about John Stossel and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at www.creators.com.
COPYRIGHT 2009 BY JFS PRODUCTIONS, INC.
DISTRIBUTED BY CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.

|
 |
Comments
|
3 Comments | Post Comment
|
|
Dear John Stossel, you're going to love this one for the latest Stimulis! This is the way governments, on all levels, work their deceit so, In terms of the 'pot calling the kettle black' - MEANING 'the politicians and their usual hype' (continue talking so you don't know what they're doing wrong is their thing) - here's a good one that I received from someone! This reminds Taxpayers of lies and deceit from politicians; naming a few slick raffles, Freddie, Fannie, AIG, Automakers, big banks, CEOS, and others who've taken Taxpayers money that doesn't belong to them. But, yes, they do know how to raffle and gamble with money that's causing America to bankrupt! =============================================================================== When Chuck was a young cowboy in Montana he bought a horse from a farmer for $100. The farmer agreed to deliver the horse the next day. The next day the farmer drove up and said, "Sorry son, but I have some bad news... the horse died." Chuck replied, "Well, then just give me my money back." The farmer said, "Can't do that. I went and spent it already." Chuck said, "Ok, then, just bring me the dead horse." The farmer asked, "What ya gonna do with him?" Chuck said, "I'm going to raffle him off.." The farmer said, "You can't raffle off a dead horse!" Chuck said, "Sure I can, Watch me. I just won't tell anybody he's dead." A month later, the farmer met up with Chuck and asked, "What happened with that dead horse?" Chuck said, "I raffled him off. I sold 500 tickets at two dollars a piece and made a profit of $998." The farmer said, "Didn't anyone complain?" Chuck said, "Just the guy who won. So I gave him his two dollars back." Chuck grew up and now works for the government. He's the one who figured out how this "bail-out" is going to work.
Comment: #1
Posted by: Shirley deLong
Thu Apr 9, 2009 4:19 PM
|
|
|
|
Dear John Stossel, PRE K IS THE USUAL SCAM, ALONG WITH MANY OF THESE 'POLITICIAL-MOTIVATED' PROGRAMS THAT'S BANKRUPTED AMERICA! News-Record (Greensboro, NC) Morning news, a former school teacher wrote an article "NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND RESEMBLES COMMUNISM!" Even the teachers know all these "so-called" programs are made by the government, so, just in case, no ones' looking, money disappears, AS USUAL!
When I was in school, there were 35-40 kids in class. We didn't have Police Officers, as we had Teachers and Principals, who ACTUALLY taught schools, and you'd better be there to learn or you'd be sent home for the parents to take care of. BUT, in todays' world, theres' only single parenting, lying on their backs, having another illegitimate to create more terrorism on American soil. SO, WHAT WE NOW HAVE IS A 'NO WIN-WIN SITUATION', brought on by these political types. Time to put an end to PUBLIC SCHOOLS (endless money pits), social and welfare programs, and make people become responsible for their own actions, as Taxpayers are fed up with, still paying Taxes for this behavior, while they're paying to send their own kids to a good Christian School, so they'll be taught ABC's, respect, character, morals and principles!
Comment: #2
Posted by: Shirley deLong
Sun Apr 12, 2009 8:04 AM
|
|
|
|
I was blessed with twin sons, so there was no question about returning to work. If my boys were enrolled in "day care" as infinats & toddlers, I would only have about $50.00 left out of a pay check because day care is expenseive & I would incur the expenses of gas, lunch, work clothes. We became very frugal, & I really did not want someone else instilling their values to my children.No question, children in day care & pre-school do not get the one on one connection, touching,cuddling or undivided attention.Not to mention the negative effect my boys would observe inappropriate behaviors,thus the possibility of picking up language & actions from providers,(who are under stress because there are so many children in the class)I know because I taught preschool for a year when my sons enrolled in Kindergarten. However I have observed 100s of folks cramming children in day care,pre-school then into schools as soon as possible so the can stop paying for day care &/or Pre-school.
I did enroll my boys in pre-school for 3 hour period 3 days a week the year before Kindergaraten in order for them to learn social behavior. Standing in lines, not speaking during class time if not raising their head, eating lunch at "school". However I watch as my sons friends were enrolling in pre-school(sometimes free if church affiliated) & Kindergarten as early as 4 years in order to stop paying pre-school. Pre- school must not be mandated or paid for by tax payers. Women should stay at home, hands on loving & teaching without another persons moral character of lack affect the children. Legalized mandatory pre-school would be day off for Mom, if she does not work or recieves federal money assistance or for the working mothers who are only working to afford the "best" & expensive car & possibly a home that is unaffordable. Get Real. One parent should stay home with their children through their education,yes, until 12th grade.It would help our economy in the fact that there would be more opportunities for jobs if Mother's especially, then men would be allowed to work at a higher paid job, because Nelly bar the door, there would be a huge number of job opportunities left vacant for the parent gave up the job & make giving the child to continue the bonding that changes as the children's age changes. More jobs available, unemployeement lowering.
Comment: #3
Posted by: Denise Hardeman
Mon Apr 13, 2009 9:59 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|