For the first time in recent memory, President Obama put universal pre-kindergarten on the national radar last week, throwing his support to making this a key national priority. As we discussed last week, the value of these early-education investments is overwhelming, but as is often the case, proponents have to think of ways to overcome reflexive Republican opposition.
With this in mind, I found Sen. Johnny Isakson's (R-Ga.) comments to MSNBC's Chris Hayes over the weekend to be particularly interesting.
For context, note that the two states that have done the most to advance pre-K are Georgia and Oklahoma, so Isakson was sticking up for his own home state when he told Hayes, "The thought that ran through my mind when the president was speaking is, 'This is a great idea.'"
So far, so good, right? Given the deep political divisions in Washington, and the radicalization of Republican politics, there probably weren't many GOP lawmakers on Capitol Hill last week for whom "great idea" came to mind in response to ideas in Obama's State of the Union.
But you had to know a "but" was coming.
Isakson added that universal pre-K would mean "a 6% increase in the number of teachers you have to hire, the number of classrooms you have to build, the amount of money you have to spend. We've got to find the money to do it."
That's true. Over the last few years, school teachers have been laid off in droves as economic austerity measures gutted public-sector employment, and an expansion of early-ed would mean hiring some of them back. We could also presumably get some economic stimulus by building more classrooms for pre-K students and their instructors.
So what's the problem?
Isakson added, "We can't afford to add a cost on government. You have to find the funds to do it. You can't just hope the payback comes in dollars. The payback comes in a better life for those children, better quality of their health, better quality of their education. But we need a payback to pay the tax dollars it's going to take to fund the programs."
In other words, Isakson believes universal pre-K is "a great idea," and is confident such an investment would be great for everyone. He also believes taxpayers shouldn't pay for it, which might represent a tough hurdle for Obama and other Democratic proponents of the idea to clear.
Still, I choose to embrace a glass-half-full approach to this. Isakson didn't say universal pre-K is a radical socialist plot to destroy families by forcing small children into government indoctrination centers; he said the president's vision is "a great idea."
These days, I'll take good news from congressional Republicans where I can find it.
Leave a Comment:
The intellegience of our young children is phenomenal, they hold the key within their hearts, we should listen.
Funny how we can find the money for a $7 Billion dollar Ford Class nuclear aircraft carrier and can't find the money for pre-school program expansion.
The defense industry has a better lobbying and PAC machine. The people and the education industry need to do a better job of getting out the message that every dollar spent on education brings in at least two dollars in return. Some of the big weapons systems are nothing but a cost.
Isakson loves to tell us about his "22 years of running a business".
The business was a real estate company- you know, the guy who brings a buyer and a seller together, and gets a piece of the action (6%) for doing it. Part of his services is arranging for the buyer to borrow a large sum of money. It is called a mortgage, and allows someone to live in a house they cannot pay for at settlement with unmarked twenty dollar bills.
So "Johnny" is well aware that Pre-K can be paid for by borrowing some money from the government, at close as possible in "math' to nothing percentage points. And that allows tiny tots to learn in their Pre-k classrooms, preparing them to grow up, pay taxes, donate to the Republican Party.
"Johnny" knows this, but hopes you don't.
"And that allows tiny tots to learn in their Pre-k classrooms, preparing them to grow up, pay taxes, donate to the Republican Party."
Oh, sweet irony...
Hopefully by then we will have become a more conscientious world, in which we can sing "The partys' over."
It is genuinely difficult for our dear Republicans to push back their hate for President Obama and see the merits of proposed common sense policy!
The dear Senator's thoughts and comments are welcomed with the caution he will most probable distance himself from his own thoughts and comments within the week due to the mysterious and dark moneyed hands of invisible "conservatives!" -Kevo
This is way beyond any kind of dislike for the president on an individual level...this is ideological (if you are with "them" you are against us) stuff...It's the slash and burn strategy the GOP has used since Gingrich was Speaker. Total political Nihilism.
I am having a hard time absorbing Republican logic on the issue of Pre K universal education. It is a wonderful policy to implement. Investing in our children is a great issue that everyone should support. How is it possible that our favorite ally, a country that we have no daylight with on any issue, is able to provide free education to all citizens from age 4 through College?
If we can provide aid in the amount of at least 10 billion dollars a year to a "foreign" country, and that "foreign" country provides benefits to its citizens that we can't afford, how does that make any sense?
10 billion dollars is a mere pittance when you consider that the Iraq and Afghanistan wars have cost us over $1 Trillion dollars and counting. Yet, no Republicans asked where the money to pay for these wars was going to come from. Republicans were eager to go to war in Iraq and did not make a peep when Bush kept it off the books. They are being disingenuous at best. And the argument that Bush was not a real conservative is just hogwash; the Republicans voted for him twice.
Ok. New construction or renovation = JOBS. New teachers = JOBS. Money spent on supplies and equipment = JOBS. And more jobs (at decent wages) increases the tax base = more REVENUE without raising TAXES = balanced budgets and decreased debt!!!
Surely they can see the math? Oh. No. Seems they can't.
They're not paying the bills so why should they care.
Sop paying the Kardashians
I'm with you, the reality shows are so far from reality, all you can do is laugh at them.
I've said before I'll say again, republicans do not want a well educated population. Their voting base would disappear.
re: hiring back public school teachers to staff pre-K programs.
Young children are rapidly developing, and behaviors of kids age 4 are very different from those age 5 and 6. This means that early childhood education is different from kindergarten and elementary school, and early childhood educators function differently than primary school teachers.
Running a preschool as kindergarten for 4-year old children would be a big mistake. Having some experience in this area I seriously doubt most public school teachers have the training and experience necessary to teach preschool.
Staffing pre-K programs will require hiring people with appropriate training, not simply calling back primary school teachers based on district seniority lists.
Teach your children well, their Fathers' hell will surely go by.
It would not take very much time, effort and money to retrain those teachers. I have been a teacher and I know that most of it is a matter of being able to analyze the needs of the students and adapt/develop a curriculum to fit their needs.
The education establishment needs to shed some of their old ways and ideas to train teachers with the right skills. They also need to develop a better lobbying machine, like the defense industry. (I used to work for a defense contractor, and for a while I even ran their PAC.)
bflynch,
My experience with the local teaching establishment is that, having already achieved a Masters degree in Education and joined the union, there will be very stiff resistance to go back to school and to changing teaching methods.
If pre-K education is funneled through the public schools the very likely result will be heavily scripted elementary school classes inappropriately forced upon four-year old children.
John: your are right that the education establishment needs to clean up its act and spend more time working to educate children and less time protecting the powers that be in the Schools of Education. I totally agree that teaching methods are too rigid, scripted, and dictated by the Schools of Education. And one of the points of my post is that teaching methods and credentials need to be more flexible and geared to the real needs of the kids and not to the Schools of Education.
When I was in the first grade in 1947, I had a bad day one day. I came into class and there was an assignment on the board. We were learning to count. The assignment consisted of drawing a duck for every number and copying a sentence that said something like: one little duck. Two little ducks, etc. I had no trouble with the concept of numbers, but no one had shown me how to draw a duck, or something that represented a duck. I fell behind in my work and did not finish before the teacher demanded that we turn in our papers. I got very upset and cried. My mother was furious when she found out about it.
In 1992 when I first moved to Colorado after losing my job in Texas at a defense contractor, I did some substitute teaching. One of my assignments was in a first grade class. I went into class before school to look over the lesson plans the teacher had left me. Guess what? There were those G-d damned ducks. Here was a poor lesson plan still being used after 45 years. (The first thing I did was show the kids how to represent a duck and assure them that the duck was just a symbol and did not have to look too much like a real duck.)
Yeah, I had lessons like that too.
The trouble is, in preschool the kids need to be guided into activities instead of directed to do an activity. For example, they should be given the option of drawing or painting and have access to gear if they wish a model (plastic dinosaurs, toy firetrucks, whatever they want). Preschoolers should not be told to draw ducks (or anything else in particular), for the point is to encourage them to visualize something on the page and develop connections between the brain and hand needed to place the image on the page.
If the kid wants to dip a toilet plunger in paint and listen to the *shlurp* while making 'rings' on the page, all the better.
This would drive most public school teachers nuts.
John: we are arguing about methods on a thread that is about authorizing/funding what in my day would have been called nursery school. Lets say yes to the concept of universal public education for 4 year olds, although that should be voluntary if parents want to do it themselves or send their children to a private school.
The kids need to learn to play together and to learn some sort of basic discipline. Yes let them draw/paint, but give them some pointers on basic shapes, etc. And of course read to them. Children do not fall into learning like a hole in the ground.
If the lesson plan I described above had required me to draw cats or rabbits, I would have been in good shape because my mother had shown me how to draw cats and rabbits. (I cannot show you what she showed me here.)
We can argue methods later, although I think the details should be left up to the teachers and not dictated by a School of Education or a school board. Give the teachers credit for some immagination and creativity and knowing the basics of education. All of our education needs to emphasize basic skills and not try to dictate specific methods. What works with one child may not work with another.
Angel...
Never can resist a song cue...
Notice the list of areas of improvement in those (pre-K) children's lives; it includes their health, in addition to the (expected) gains in education. I think that's where Isakson will see the source of funding. If those children, by having pre-K ed, are going to be healthier, then they won't need Obamacare when they're older, will they? Repubs have never given up trying to zap Obamacare, one way or another. Several of them were spouting over the weekend about "trading" Obamacare funding for this, that, and t'other to avoid the automatic sequester. Listening to them, one got the idea that their motto is "if Pentagon is healthy, you'll be healthy too. Or else"
Kids that attend a decent preschool learn to socialize with their peers and adults in a structured environment. This leads to better results in K-12 school, college, the workforce, in their families, and the greater community.
The return on investment comes from greater career earnings (higher taxes), greater career stability (less need for retraining and more profits for companies = higher taxes), more stable families (with better adjusted kids, less need for services), less trouble with the law (less incarceration and time in court), and less self-medication for one's woes (better health).
Or, to put it a bit more simplistically, the one thing most felons in state prison have in common is a miserable and isolated childhood. Preschool programs work against that.
Pre-K is a hideous idea no matter who advances it. Public education is deplorable.That's why beltway politicians send their kids to private schools sugar pie. The Ol' "High School" education means little now.When can we quit calling it "High" school ? If college is a must then why are public educated kids ill prepared for it ?
I know people with a diploma or even a degree, who can barely read and write.You should see the memos and e-mails.The "future" of America looks bleak to me. That's why we have to import intellect, we have little native, young with any. Plus they have no work ethic to boot.
I'm confident McConnell will pull him back into the fold before it's time for a vote. Remember how that con Senator - forget his name - worked hand in glove with baucus during the Obamacare writing? He was no where in sight come time to vote.
Perhaps to fund this we should start little labor camps, ya know, so those taker-children have some skin in the game.
See the snark? Oh! It bit you!