Rob Reiner's ballot initiative

[realFedUp]

http://goldenstateblog.latimes.com/
Michael Hiltzik
Nov 17

Ohhh....ROB!

The cultural reference is to Rob Petrie, of course, not Rob Reiner, but it’s still very a propos. Reiner, who is uusally identified as an actor/director/activist, is reportedly poised to announce that his universal preschool initiative has collected enough signatures to go on the next statewide ballot, in June. The measure would provide a half-day of preschool for all children over four years old, to be financed by raising the top state tax rate on the wealthiest Californians (that’s individuals earning more than $400,000 and couples earning more than $800,000) to 11% from 9.3%.

Once again, this is ballot-box budgeting of the worst sort. No doubt we can all agree that universal preschool is a marvelous idea. Many of us agree that raising taxes on the wealthiest residents is also a marvelous idea. Yoking the two concepts together is a terrible idea.

Why? Because the top tax bracket is the most precious stream of revenue we have in California. The roughly 25,000 tax returns in the category would produce about $2.7 billion more at the 11% rate. As Reiner and many others (including me) have pointed out, the cost of the increase for the average taxpayer in the bracket would be nominal, and much less than these same taxpayers have reaped from the Bush tax cuts at the federal level. Despite their squealing, it’s hardly likely that many of them, or any of them, would bolt the state in protest. This income class has escaped many of the sacrifices the rest of us have made during the state’s fiscal crisis, and they should pay up. My response to their protests has generally been: "Tough noogies."

But this revenue stream, obviously, can only be tapped once. What’s the argument for segregating the money for the sole purpose of providing preschool?

Reiner contends that preschool yields unique benefits. He cites a RAND Corp. report estimating that California would get back $2.62 for every dollar it invests in preschool.

Promoters of spending initiatives adore such statistics, because while they sound impressive, they're absolutely meaningless and totally unverifiable. At what point would RAND go back and measure the economic effect of Reiner’s preschool act? In 2025? How would it distinguish the payoff from preschool from any of the other myriad variables influencing the budget over a couple of decades? And what if it were wrong? (For a recent example of how promises of payoffs to come can be misused by dishonest initiative promoters, see the stem cell initiative of 2004, which is already looking like a pig in a poke before a single dollar has been spent.)

continued

[LeftyMom]

1. I disagree with the idea of universal preschool

Preschool was created to give underprivledged kids some of the advantages other children had in starting school. It's ability to do so is limited at best (by grade three there is no measurable difference between preschool attendees and kids who start school in kindergarten) but that track record is applied by the suppourters of Reiner's initiative to all children, without much evidence that preschool does the majority of children any good at all. However the measure will likely prove popular because people will appreciate the free day care. :eyes:

Young kids need thier parents and families, we do them a disservice to deny that contact in the name of "progress."

[padia]

2. From what I understand

there is a company that set up a program 40 years ago & has done the long term studies on the benefits of pre-school. Their information is what First 5 is citing in their commercials to push pre-school. This study was set up with the under privileged so that all of these great results can be achieved not only by the well to do. Went to a Parent Advisory Board on Pre-school with Clovis unified this morning and what they were reporting is that pre-school will still be voluntary participation but will become available to all who want it.

[Ranec]

3. Another benefit of universal pre-school -- it is also daycare.

My suspicion is that there are a lot of families that are relieved when their children are finally old enough to go to school so that they don't have to spend as much on daycare.

Am I wrong?

I do share the concern about legislating through propositions. Isn't this the kind of things that our lovely liberal legislature could take on?

[Xithras]

4. Huh? This is already being worked on at the state level.

Many school districts around the state either already have, or are preparing to, implement Pre-K programs. There's also been a lot of discussion and long term analysis at the state level of the possibility of creating an optional Pre-K grade as a standard part of the statewide primary school curriculum...preschool would just become another grade level offered on elementary school campuses.

Why on earth would Reiner propose this when there are already other proposals working their way through regular legislative channels? Especially when those other proposals have met practically no opposition? All he's going to do is politicize this and turn it into a fight!

[padia]

5. this is supposed

to be a voluntary program not a mandated participation. Also the tax that is to be collected is to codify the program. What else that is being noticed is that their is a large gap between those who are subsidized and those who have the expendable income. This initiative is to embrace everyone especially those who fall into the "gap" and are missing out on the opportunity.