Government pre-school monopoly

There is no doubt that abortion and clean government are big issues in South Dakota as they are on the ballot. But how those two issues play out on election day has already been influenced by the humanist indoctrination that is found as the religion of the government’s public education system. Freeing the pre-born and restoring a limited government is now an uphill battle. That is why I consider the huge effort to advance the government school monopoly into pre-school and day cares as the biggest issue that we are faced with as conservatives today. And in South Dakota the RINOs are leading the charge:

Sen. Tom Dempster, R-Sioux Falls, says the upcoming legislative election could change the opposition. "Sometimes people have to change," he said.

Dempster doesn't accept Hanushek's premise that not enough is known about the benefits of preschool education, but he does say South Dakota will never have a universal, mandatory program.

"There is compelling evidence of the importance of pre-K to students' education," Dempster said. "But we will never have universal pre-K. That simply won't happen."

The benefit of state involvement in preschool programs would be directed to children whose families couldn't otherwise afford the program, he said.

How about those families who can’t afford private schools or homeschooling? Currently the government monopoly refuses to allow vouchers and give parents "choice". Technically the K-12 government styled schooling is also voluntary, that is…if you are wealthy. And the biggest proponent of the government’s extension of its monopoly is our GOP governor:

Rounds, in an address to school superintendents in Pierre on Tuesday, said, "Preschool is something that is very, very important."

Efforts to require state standards for preschool have failed in the past two legislative sessions. Opponents worried that what supporters call a voluntary effort would become a mandatory statewide prekindergarten program.

The Rounds administration supported the unsuccessful legislative effort, and the governor's 2010 education initiative includes a Starting Strong goal that says the state should "ensure that all students entering kindergarten are performing at developmentally appropriate levels."

Rounds saying "all students" contradicts Dempster’s "we will never have universal pre-K".

Radioactive Chief response with this:

EuroSocialists, Lenin, Hitler, and Plato would all be in agreement with the Governor on this one. How so?

Mrs. Chief recently received some correspondence from Norwegian cousins who related that their first child was starting the (government mandated) kindergarten - at one-year of age!!

Plato’s Republic advocated that the training of children was too important to leave to the parents, and that to obtain good citizens of the polis, systematic removal from parents for training was the ideal to be implemented.

The above noted 20th-century devotees of the superior wisdom and knowledge of their respective states (of totalitarianism) also advocated, and implemented programs to reduce the influence of parents in the early childhood education of children, again, in the interest of getting more reliable citizens of their versions of a "new world order".

Rounds and Dempster refuse to accept the research that shows pre-school does not have a lasting impact on academic performance. Bob Ellis does show that pre-school does have a lasting impact on behavior:

ABCcarried a story on behavioral problems several months ago:

Janine Butler, a 28-year-old New Jersey teacher, knows something about out-of-control students.

One girl threw objects, threatened Butler with knives and tried to bite her. Another boy was "just rude, rude, rude," pulling down his pants and swearing at her. The final straw came when another student scratched and hit her.

Butler's students were barely out of diapers — 3- and 4-year-olds — and their public preschool in Trenton was not allowed to expel them.

"No one would do anything," said Butler, who eventually quit. "I felt alone."

Tantrums, aggression, biting and kicking are becoming increasingly common in preschool, according to child development specialists.

Another study from the University of Minnesota found that, based on levels of the stress-sensitive hormone cortisol, shy children suffer increased levels of stress while in full time daycare.

A 2001 study found that the more time children spent in daycare, the more aggressive, disobedient, and defiant they became.

Cindy Flakoll of Concerned Women for America - South Dakota did a couple of pieces on the pre-k problem last year. She also pointed out studies supporting the benefits of pre-k haven't been able to be replicated, and that most research doesn't support any sort of long-lasting academic benefit from preschool. In the end, taxpayers get taken for a ride that goes nowhere.

And Ellis gives good advice to those who want to give an informed vote in November:

The South Dakota Family Policy Council's 2008 primary Voter Guide examined the pre-k issue. Not all of the respondents survived the primary, but you might want to check the guide to see where those that did are on the issue.

It seems the only people in South Dakota really pushing pre-k are the liberal "mainstream" media and edu-crats who stand to gain financially from more taxpayer largess.

The taxpayers have too much to lose on a scheme that lacks foundation. Parents also have too much to lose by placing their young children in an environment where they may develop behavioral problems and end up with unhealthy aggression.

This is an issue where fiscal conservative libertarians and social conservatives can join forces. In South Dakota, the GOP has control over the political process and unfortunately the RINOs have control over the South Dakota GOP party. For two years we have been successful at stopping the joint efforts of RINOS, liberal Democrats, the mainstream media, and also the Chamber of Commerce from advancing the government monopoly that includes creating Hillary’s village. This battle is continuing and we need a strong voice of truth to power, because the power is great. And in regard to power and the SD blogosphere, Pat Powers, the self-proclaimed number one blog in the SD blogosphere, is among those RINOs who favor government pre-school.

Comments

[PP at the SDWC]

As usual Sibby, you once again get it wrong, wrong, WRONG.

I have never said I'm in favor of mandatory pre-school. In fact, I've specifically opposed it. All that I've ever noted that I'm in favor of are minimum standards for those schools that choose to offer preschool.

Making sure an educational program is actually educational is a legitimate consumer protection function of the state.

And as for being #1, I just can't help it. That's Blognews network's opinion, not mine.

[Sibby’s response: No Pat, you got it wrong. I never said you were “in favor of mandatory pre-school”. I said, “favor government pre-school” as you promote the government establishing the standards as opposed to the parents. And then it is only those who are willing to follow the government mandates who get the benefit of their tax monies. Dempster and the rest of you RINOs can say your against the Village that you want to walk toward all you want. Us conservatives believe the free market will guarantee quality, not the government.]