It’s For The Children. Really, This Time. Promise.

Yesterday I watched Her Royal Highness Christine Gregoire’s press conference marking the end of the special legislative session. (Honestly, the things I go through in order to write this blog! You all should be paying me, but I digress.)

I don’t agree with HRH on much of anything, but I do admire her skill as a politician, something that first struck me during the 2008 gubernatorial debates with Dino Rossi. I noticed at the time that she was very disciplined about sticking to her talking points; yesterday, she exhibited the same skill by turning each question back to one of a handful of talking points. Of these, the one she mentioned most by far was that three-year-olds from disadvantaged families would continue to have access to subsidized preschool.

It’s a good strategy. If you have to talk about raising taxes new revenue sources, you have to sugar it up somehow and who can resist a cute three-year-old in need? Only a miserable excuse for a human being (or a Republican!) would object to helping three-year-olds, right? One snag; early pre-school programs for disadvantaged children don’t confer any long-range benefits to the children they’re designed to help.

Why, then, are these early childhood programs included in the State budget at all? Because it makes the liberals in the State legislature feel good to do so. They get to feel good about helping toddlers and, since it’s the thought that counts, they don’t feel the need to hold themselves accountable for delivering results.

Don’t you think it’s time Washington voters started demanding a return on their investment?

Random questions: What are our “State values” that HRH mentioned so many times? Did we vote, because if we did, I missed it.


Filed under Washington

2 responses to “It’s For The Children. Really, This Time. Promise.

  1. Marcus

    Im about to move out of washington and move to texas if things dont change.

  2. Angela Beegle

    This was a line that Roger Goodman used a LOT at the last Town Hall in Kirkland. He went on and on about the necessity of putting ‘disadvantaged kids’ into preschool, so they would not grow up to be criminals and thus cost the state more money.

    I wonder if it ever occurred to him that was he was really saying was this:

    Those poor folks can’t raise their own children right. Government can do a better job of raising their children than they can, so we need to get their kids away from them on any pretext, OR THEY WILL GROW UP WRONG.

    Never mind that Headstart and other ‘universal preschool’ programs have been shown to exibit no long-term advantage, and that kids who start young, and those who start later, all tend to level out around the age of 8…..

    He wanted to save the State money. The end.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s