One fundamental problem with government is that the only solution it seems capable of providing is even more government.
This November, Mayor John Hickenlooper’s well-meaning proposal to hike Denver’s sales tax to help fund preschool education will be on the ballot.
“I believe that Denver needs more quality preschools,” explained Councilwoman Judy Montero.
She’s right. The operative word is “quality” and it’s the best reason to keep government out of the preschool business.
California voters recently rejected a universal preschool tax – which, to be fair, was a plan Karl Marx might have embraced – and Denver residents have twice in recent years said no to a preschool tax.
So why then was Jeanne Faatz the only Denver city councilor to oppose the plan this time around?
“I find a number of things I don’t like in it. One is the tax implication. I was surprised that they were going after a sales tax,” she explains. “And I am very concerned about expanding the tuition subsidy. We have so many needs looming in front of us. We’re still trying to catch up on the recession.”
Well, we could always raise taxes again next year. Just a little … really. Then just a little again next year – and so on.
Faatz contends that Denver is already burdened with “enormous” capital needs. And she can’t recall a single constituent calling to register a complaint about preschool funding.
Faatz then proceeded to rattle off about a half-dozen programs and subsidizes available on the state and federal level for “at-risk” kids – “at-risk” a euphemism for “poor.”
“Not only is it unwise to start down the path of expanding Denver government, but there are other groups operating on this level, helping kids,” she explains.
Faatz also maintains that the funding mechanism for this tax hike is unfair: Why should poor people subsidize the preschool of the rich? By raising sales taxes – a tax everyone pays – that’s exactly what would happen.
But a component that seems most harmful is the proposed “quality-improvement” system.
You know, there’s already a brilliant “quality-improvement plan” in place. It’s called parenting. And as a parent, I sure don’t want a government-mandated council deciding what “quality” education entails for my kids.
We can all witness what a government-run monopoly in public education in poor neighborhoods has done in the “quality-improvement” department. Why allow the inevitable red tape and inflexibility to infect preschools?
Faatz also wonders why Denver would hand over $12 million to a group without a proven track record.
The council that will manage the money will be comprised of political appointees. And political appointees – whatever their intentions – always carry political baggage.
“Here you have a program with no track record of results, with no history. What political agenda is going to be played out?” asks Faatz. “When something isn’t exactly the the way we want it, we create a new bureaucracy as treatment. If there is anything specific that needs an adjustment, a specific problem, I’m all for fixing it.”
Geez, Faatz must really hate those poor little rosy-cheeked children.
“We all love children. I was a teacher. I am mom. My daughter is a mom. … But this program is fatally flawed,” says Faatz. She has other concerns, including that illegal immigrants can get stipends and the preschool subsidy can be taken to schools outside Denver.
There are positives as well. The plan calls for the stipend, like a voucher, to follow the child not the school. Perhaps one day, such vouchers will find their way into the K-12 system and poor children will be allowed to escape failing schools.
It will be interesting to see if Denver ites once again see through the inevitable heart-wrenching “for-the-children” campaign tactics employed by proponents.
David Harsanyi’s column appears Monday and Thursday. Reach him at 303-954-1255 or dharsanyi@denverpost.com
