It’s Time To Kill Head Start.

For Advertising Info, Write.
rwnews@blogads.com

Premium Left blogad

Left Blog Ad

Permalinks

It’s Time To Kill Head Start.

Written By : John Hawkins

Actually, we should have killed Head Start a long time ago. Even a heavily massaged report by the Department of Health and Human Services admits that the program is essentially a waste of time:

In sum, this report finds that providing access to Head Start has benefits for both 3-year-olds and 4-year-olds in the cognitive, health, and parenting domains, and for 3-year-olds in the social-emotional domain. However, the benefits of access to Head Start at age four are largely absent by 1st grade for the program population as a whole. For 3-year-olds, there are few sustained benefits, although access to the program may lead to improved parent-child relationships through 1st grade…

We’ve spent 100 billion dollars on Head Start since 1965 and we’re seeing some tiny improvement that lasts from age 4 to 1st grade? Is it any wonder this country is bankrupt and living on credit from China?

So, we have an enormously expensive program that doesn’t work; can it get any worse? We’re talking about the government here, so OF COURSE it can get worse. It turns out that Head Start is riddled with fraud:

An undercover investigation into the federal government’s Head Start program has found enough enrollment abuses to generate a report to President Obama and a major damage-control effort by the agency that runs the program.

At a hearing Tuesday, members of the House Education and Labor Committee heard dramatic audio clips of fraud being taken by Government Accountability Office (GAO) agents. In one clip, a New Jersey Head Start worker handed back a $23,000 pay stub to two agents who were pretending to enroll their children in the preschool program.

“Now you see it, now you don’t,” the Head Start worker said.

…In testimony presented to the House panel Tuesday, GAO special investigations official Gregory D. Kutz said that in at least eight cases, Head Start employees “manipulated” information to admit ineligible children.

Enrollment rules were so lax, he warned, that Head Start workers could easily “doctor” enrollment applications, and families could enter the program with “bogus” documents created at home.

…Head Start, created 45 years ago as a “war on poverty” program, receives $7 billion a year. Last year, it received an extra $2 billion under the stimulus bill, and the Obama administration has requested another $1 billion for it for 2011.

Head Start’s main purpose is to narrow the school-readiness gap by giving poor preschoolers free educational, medical, nutritional and social services.

Early studies have showed that Head Start services pay off when the children start school.

But in January, a massive, 10-year study found that by the time Head Start children finish first grade, they score no better than non-Head Start children on most of 112 measures.

So, everyone knows the program doesn’t work and it’s run behind-the-scenes with ACORN-style ethics rules. Yet, we were spending 7 billion dollars a year on it when Obama came into office and he borrowed another 3 billion dollars for a non-functional program. It’s time to stop wasting our money. It’s time for the Head Start program to die.

baoxian

What do you mean? Of course it's achieving it's goals. Not learning, of course. Getting poor and minority kids bought into government dependence and seperated from their parents as early as possible.

“Education is a weapon, whose effect depends on who holds it in his hands and at whom it is aimed.” – Joseph Stalin
Rick

Just attacking this program the old way isn't going to work – we all know what the libs and their MSM allies will do. Here's a different approach that conservatives in congress should take.

Present this as a “Social Justice” issue. This program is in effect stealing from those in need. That 7B or 9 or 11, or whatever it is, could actually be going to a program that might actually HELP those in need. Put together a bill that does two things – kills Head Start and also re-allocates that 7B to another social program (an existing one – for gods sake, don't start a new one). That way, the libs won't be able to paint it as a “heartless republican” issue.

“But that won't actually reduce spending” you say! Of course it won't. We've learned over time that you can't reduce the budget with a scalpel. Every program has its entrenched interests that will fight it. Instead, the budget must be attacked with a sledge hammer – an across the board cut. That's the only way to reach the vast majority of the American people and get them on board.

So my plan is basically reallocate to eliminate the worst programs, and use across the board cuts to bring the budget down.

President Friedman

That is a great idea… bordering on genius, actually. I'd love to see that incorporated into the GOP's deficit reduction strategy on a wide scale.

http://conservativebootcamp.com Martin Hale

5 or 6 years ago I took on an engagement with an educational/social service agency in a large Southern California metropolitan area. They were a start-up in the business of spending $10MM of “First Five” monies on universal preschool programmes. My role was to create their HR environment – Employee Handbook, benefits, HRIS, HR Ps & Ps, compensation system, job descriptions, etc. Of the 100 or so staff there at the time, probably 80% were former Head Start folks.

As a consultant who's seen lots of organisations in his career, I'd have to rate that one as one of the absolute worst. The only thing I could find that was truly 'universal' there was incompetence – it was present at every level of the organisation, from the bottom to the top. It wasn't the incompetence of a poorly structured organisation – it was the personal incompetence of the people, especially those in administrative roles. And the most incompetent ones were the ones who'd been around Head Start the longest. They were also the ones who were most deluded about the alleged benefits which pre-school supposedly confers on kids who attend it.

The only fortunate thing was that the funding for the “First Five” initiative came from a special state tax on tobacco, which meant that I wasn't contributing a dime to this folly.

Rick

>> funding for the “First Five” initiative came from a special state tax on tobacco

Martin – you can look at it that way, but money is fungible. That means that if the money wasn't there from the tobacco tax, they'd just get it from somewhere else. In reality, you are paying for it. It's like when they claim that the money from the lottery goes directly to benefit education. In reality, it just means the state has to pony up less from some other budget category. It's all really one pot of money in the end – the distinctions are illusions to confuse voters.

http://conservativebootcamp.com Martin Hale

Perhaps I should have explained in more detail that the universal preschool effort was only one county's use of the First Five monies. The First Five tax was approved as a statewide ballot initiative (Prop 10 in 1998) and was, unlike lottery revenues, legislatively tied to specific expenditure limitations, plus, it could not be placed into the general fund, so it couldn't be co-opted so easily. The state allocated the funds to the counties based on their birth rates and each county was free to spend the money on programmes of their choice, but the overarching thrust had to be on services for children from birth to five years old. Some counties used the money to fund existing programmes in order to do what you suggest, which is free up funds for other expenditures. But the overwhelming majority of services funded by Prop 10 didn't exist before the passage of the law.

I hear what you're saying about the general principle that they might have gotten the monies elsewhere, but since these funds were directly approved by voters, and were legislatively constrained, I'm not sure the all same old rules really apply. The law the voters approved did a good job of creating a firewall around the money it generates, which I think should be the model for all taxes.

Taxes are generally execrable, as are the majority of current government “services” – necessary evils at best, if you ask me – but at least this one won a fair and square majority among voters. Probably the worst aspect of Prop 10 for me was that it levied this tax on a small segment of the population (tobacco users) who didn't have a prayer of defeating the ~70% – 75% of people who aren't tobacco users. That seemed a little too targeted for my liking.

D-Vega

Of course no one likes fraud or incompetence, but Head Start is an invaluable program, especially to kids who need extra instruction.

I didn't need special instruction, but I did go to head start and it benefitted me greatly. I was way ahead of my class in both kindergarten and 1st grade. That set tone for entire elementary and middle school performance as I was grades ahead of other students in terms of reading, math and social skills.

One study is absurd, given the huge amount of kids who have benefited. My son is now benefitting as well, getting extra instruction.

Any teacher will tell you that the earlier you start in a classroom, the better. The same goes if its called Pre-K.

Conservatives will always find a way to shit on things like this, because if they had their way there wouldn't be any public kindergarten or public school, period.

http://www.patriotpost.com bthewolf

I don't have anything against public scholls, just FEDERAL funding, schools are local issues and should be funded locally, PERIOD. Cut out the middle man and quit paying fed taxes to siphon through a fed bureaucrat, and pay it straight to the schools.

Talk about a cluster fuck, thank you Jimmah Cahtah, you liberal asswipe!

http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/C2UYYYSPBB7S3NC3NQ7NOJFLME Peter

You blowhard. Your goal of funding schools locally is what causes disparities between low income and high income areas. As a society. we need to value all kids equally, not divide them based on their parents financial predicaments.

Your goal was achieved in California, where the education system was destroyed by Proposition 13. Thankfully I got through school before the bottom completely fell out. When I was at UC in the 1980s I paid $500/quarter and received a Pell grant for my last year.

Your foolish type, pizza boy, is that which prefers prisons over education.

http://www.patriotpost.com bthewolf

You freakin moron, local can mean STATE. Thanks for rpoving your both an asshole and a complete ifiot, as well as utterly ignorant of COTUS: which makes NO provision for funding schools, or retirement,or welfare,or hundreds of other prorams that siphon money from our pockets.

UFKA_Smithwick

According to the evidence it isn't working.

Besides this study we have plenty of data showing that in this period of time we've actually been losing ground against other nations. Clearly it isn't helping.

“Any teacher will tell you that the earlier you start in a classroom, the better. The same goes if its called Pre-K. “

Any teacher will tell you the more a teacher gets paid, the better job security and benefits they have the the better. That doesn't mean the kids are going to perform any better though.

If we spent 100 billion to benefit a few kids then the program is a bust. That money needs to be redirected.

I have no problem with a large education budget, so long as it can be shown to be worthwhile. I have no interest in spending more and more simply to make people feel like they're doing something.

We could give our fire-departments several hundred billion dollars more than they are currently getting so that they can dump piles of hundreds on to every fire they are called to put out. It wouldn't work but you could at least say you voted for massive increases in spending for the FD so you're doing your part to help out the community.

Personally I'd advocate using water.

Rick

UFKA_Smithwick>> If we spent 100 billion to benefit a few kids then the program is a bust. That money needs to be redirected.

You are so right. People, including libs, need to open their eyes and realize that the fed is not a limitless pool of money. Everything they spend money on is the result of a choice – and that choice is to NOT spend that money on something else, that could do more good.

mightysamurai

Of course no one likes fraud or incompetence, but Head Start is an invaluable program, especially to kids who need extra instruction.

Oh Christ on a cracker.

Did you even BOTHER to read the post, you poo-flinging moron?

D-Vega

Yes, I did samurai. I also read the entire report. Did you?

mightysamurai

Yeah, especially the part that goes like this:

However, the benefits of access to Head Start at age four are largely absent by 1st grade for the program population as a whole. For 3-year-olds, there are few sustained benefits, although access to the program may lead to improved parent-child relationships through 1st grade…

Did you see it? Here, I'll post it again just in case:

However, the benefits of access to Head Start at age four are largely absent by 1st grade for the program population as a whole. For 3-year-olds, there are few sustained benefits, although access to the program may lead to improved parent-child relationships through 1st grade…

How about that time? Did it get through that time? Here, I'll post it one more time just to be sure:

However, the benefits of access to Head Start at age four are largely absent by 1st grade for the program population as a whole. For 3-year-olds, there are few sustained benefits, although access to the program may lead to improved parent-child relationships through 1st grade…

I swear, somebody must have beaten you about the head and neck with the dumbass stick today, D-Vega.

StanW

If Vega is an example of someone who has “benefitted greatly” from Head Start, then we are ALL due a tax refund.
http://conservativebootcamp.com Martin Hale

Good one Stan.
D-Vega

Doesn't say much for the many debaters on this site, either. Since a public school grad soundly spanks the lot of you on a regular basis.
StanW

Sure you do, Vega. All evidence to the contrary!

Your lies and your abject stupidity put us all to shame. You make me believe in reincarnation, as no one could become the idiot you are in just one lifetime.
http://www.patriotpost.com bthewolf

Who's that WU? 'Cause it sure ain't YOU!
D-Vega

Read the report, Sam. There are variables within the sample. 5,000 kids doesn't quantify something that's been around for decades, and helped millions.

Of course the Heritage Foundation would take full advantage, since this is yet another set-up to call for vouchers, which only seek the destruction of the public school system as a whole.

Christopher_Taylor

Of course no one likes fraud or incompetence, but Head Start is an invaluable program, especially to kids who need extra instruction.

Actually studies have shown the kids who get this program are no better off on average than those who do not. And its unconstitutional. That equals “cut” in my book

UFKA_Smithwick

Have to love the federal government. Is there any problem they can't solve by pouring money in to it?

And by “solve” I mean make substantially worse. And by “pouring money in to it” I mean “pouring a whole lot of money in to it, like it would be comical if it weren't making our children indentured servants to the chinese”.
Christopher_Taylor

Government-funded education is unconstitutional and, as it turns out, a failure as well. The time to cut all these programs passed decades ago. The Democrats trying to fund teachers' unions in a military funding bill is even worse.

http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/C2UYYYSPBB7S3NC3NQ7NOJFLME Peter

Wow.

Unconstitutional?

Wow.

StanW

Yes, Peter/Zimmy… UNCONSTITUTIONAL!

If you disagree, please provide for us the passage from the United States Constitution that gives the Federal government the authority to fund education.
Christopher Taylor

I realize this probably never occured to you but the fact is the US Constitution only permits the federal government to do the things which are listed in it. The 10th amendment specifically reinforces this, and the federalist papers of the guys who wrote the constitution make that very, very clear.

Not that this matters to guys like you. Even if you were finally forced by the facts and evident reason to admit that this is, in fact, an unconstitutional program, you would still say it should be happening because of a “greater truth” or some overarching leftist dogma.

Gingrich: Defeating Obama ‘Most Dangerous President in US History’ a ‘Duty Of National Security’

Previous Features

Premium Right Ads

Blogads Right

User Info

Features

Archives Best of RWN Humor John Hawkins Interviews Quotes Special to RWN