Pre-K and the Right
In an otherwise solid piece about Oklahoma’s universal pre-K program -- the nation’s gold standard that also happens to be in a solid red state -- the Times’ David Leonhardt fumbles toward the end when he writes: “…preschool cuts across some of the usual ideological lines. Liberals like its antipoverty bent; conservatives prefer education to straight income redistribution….The biggest opponents tend to be religious conservatives worried about the creation of a nanny state.” Leaving aside that liberals support universal pre-K for all kinds of good reasons beyond its ‘bent’ (sic), the broad conservative movement – not just the religious right -- HATES the idea. Why? Not only because it’s an expansion of government, but because it’s an expansion of government that also works. Movement conservatives really hate stuff like that, because it makes their cerebrums itch.
The right has opposed Head Start since day one. And movement fortresses like Heritage, Cato, the Reason Foundation, the Pacific Research Institute, the Heartland Institute, and so forth have spewed out their usual intellectually bankrupt garbage for years attacking the idea of any new public investments in pre-school. At the state and local level, some Republican officials have indeed supported universal pre-school. But highlighting the broader conservative movement’s opposition to an increasingly popular idea that's effective is another way that our side can continue to isolate, shrink, and ultimately drown the right in a bathtub. They are running out of ideas, and no one should be confused that pre-K is in any semblance one of theirs.
Full Version: Pre-K and the Right
QUOTE(Noonan @ Feb 7 2007, 06:44 PM) 
Pre-K and the Right
In an otherwise solid piece about Oklahoma’s universal pre-K program -- the nation’s gold standard that also happens to be in a solid red state -- the Times’ David Leonhardt fumbles toward the end when he writes: “…preschool cuts across some of the usual ideological lines. Liberals like its antipoverty bent; conservatives prefer education to straight income redistribution….The biggest opponents tend to be religious conservatives worried about the creation of a nanny state.” Leaving aside that liberals support universal pre-K for all kinds of good reasons beyond its ‘bent’ (sic), the broad conservative movement – not just the religious right -- HATES the idea. Why? Not only because it’s an expansion of government, but because it’s an expansion of government that also works. Movement conservatives really hate stuff like that, because it makes their cerebrums itch.
The right has opposed Head Start since day one. And movement fortresses like Heritage, Cato, the Reason Foundation, the Pacific Research Institute, the Heartland Institute, and so forth have spewed out their usual intellectually bankrupt garbage for years attacking the idea of any new public investments in pre-school. At the state and local level, some Republican officials have indeed supported universal pre-school. But highlighting the broader conservative movement’s opposition to an increasingly popular idea that's effective is another way that our side can continue to isolate, shrink, and ultimately drown the right in a bathtub. They are running out of ideas, and no one should be confused that pre-K is in any semblance one of theirs.
In an otherwise solid piece about Oklahoma’s universal pre-K program -- the nation’s gold standard that also happens to be in a solid red state -- the Times’ David Leonhardt fumbles toward the end when he writes: “…preschool cuts across some of the usual ideological lines. Liberals like its antipoverty bent; conservatives prefer education to straight income redistribution….The biggest opponents tend to be religious conservatives worried about the creation of a nanny state.” Leaving aside that liberals support universal pre-K for all kinds of good reasons beyond its ‘bent’ (sic), the broad conservative movement – not just the religious right -- HATES the idea. Why? Not only because it’s an expansion of government, but because it’s an expansion of government that also works. Movement conservatives really hate stuff like that, because it makes their cerebrums itch.
The right has opposed Head Start since day one. And movement fortresses like Heritage, Cato, the Reason Foundation, the Pacific Research Institute, the Heartland Institute, and so forth have spewed out their usual intellectually bankrupt garbage for years attacking the idea of any new public investments in pre-school. At the state and local level, some Republican officials have indeed supported universal pre-school. But highlighting the broader conservative movement’s opposition to an increasingly popular idea that's effective is another way that our side can continue to isolate, shrink, and ultimately drown the right in a bathtub. They are running out of ideas, and no one should be confused that pre-K is in any semblance one of theirs.
I agreed to send our daughter to pre-school as I figured it wasn't a battle worth engaging with my wife. My problem with pre-school is it that if I have to pay for it, its a scam. There is nothing that a 4yr old can learn, that they can't learn at 5 and it will cause them to be left behind later on. If people can send their kids to pre-K for free I have no problem with it, else its just a business and a way to take cash out of my pocket. I bet the VAST majority of us here on this forum did not go to pre-k and we came out fairly educated. I find pre-K to be a useless exercise, you got to school from age 5 -21 in most cases, do you need to add on another year? Whats next pre-pre-K???
QUOTE(GOPGuy @ Apr 10 2007, 09:53 PM)
I agreed to send our daughter to pre-school as I figured it wasn't a battle worth engaging with my wife. My problem with pre-school is it that if I have to pay for it, its a scam. There is nothing that a 4yr old can learn, that they can't learn at 5 and it will cause them to be left behind later on. If people can send their kids to pre-K for free I have no problem with it, else its just a business and a way to take cash out of my pocket. I bet the VAST majority of us here on this forum did not go to pre-k and we came out fairly educated. I find pre-K to be a useless exercise, you got to school from age 5 -21 in most cases, do you need to add on another year? Whats next pre-pre-K???
I think in many cases we are starting our children in school too early. In NV Kindergarten wasn't/isn't mandatory, but you have to register your child for 1st grade by age 7. Pre-k to me is daycare, or a place your child can socialize with other children, but never meant to be a total learning system.
Being a kid is great, they should enjoy and savor it while everything is fresh and new.
Both my kids went to pre-K. My daughter learned how to write her letters, numbers, and social skills she really needed (she's as shy as her dad). Her pre-K was exactly what my kindergarten was many years ago. She's doing a great job this year in kindergarten. They are doing adding (subtracting before the school year is out), science (she tells me all about the planets) and stuff we didn't do until other grades.
My son, on the other hand, we've decided to pull out of pre-K because he doesn't quite have the maturity. He can't handle kids in his class that act out. He says his teacher "makes him do boring stuff like letters", so he's going back to the city run 2 hour preschool program he really loves. That program prepares kids for kindergarten as well, but its not as rigorous. I've found that he's learned more at pre-k than we thought, I was worried about what he had been doing all the days he was there, but now I see he knows most of what he's "supposed" to know at this point of the year.
No, we don't have to pay for either one of these out of pocket, we're already paying for them through our taxes.
My son, on the other hand, we've decided to pull out of pre-K because he doesn't quite have the maturity. He can't handle kids in his class that act out. He says his teacher "makes him do boring stuff like letters", so he's going back to the city run 2 hour preschool program he really loves. That program prepares kids for kindergarten as well, but its not as rigorous. I've found that he's learned more at pre-k than we thought, I was worried about what he had been doing all the days he was there, but now I see he knows most of what he's "supposed" to know at this point of the year.
No, we don't have to pay for either one of these out of pocket, we're already paying for them through our taxes.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.