Spot on. There's no excuse for the kind of short shrifting early childhood education and development gets - it's quite literally robbing the future. Now if only we could segue this initiative with one that guarantees no more than 20 students per class at any level of primary or secondary education.

Spot on. There's no excuse for the kind of short shrifting early childhood education and development gets - it's quite literally robbing the future.

Exactly. That’s why most of the left, moderate, and right support pre-K funding.

Newman attempts to put his own bizarre spin on it as usual though:

Here's the dirty little secret that conservatives hate to admit.  "Tax the rich" politics is popular and successful, especially when the proposed taxes are used to relieve financial pressures on families struggling with balancing the demands of work and family.

Dirty little secret? Talk about spin-o-rama. Maybe the Norquist’s of the world would hate to admit it, but this is CA we’re talking about. I don’t see many Norquist types holding office in CA. In CA most conservatives (by CA standards) are voting for pre-K funding just like the left and middle. That was the point about its broad bi-partisan popularity… So where’s the “dirty little secret” exactly?

But whatever, I wouldn’t expect reality to penetrate Newman’s tinfoil hat.

The original article described the conditions for the initiative as follows:

It had to be for any 4-year-old who wants it -- universal preschool.

It had to be fully funded.

Quality had to be a top priority.

And, perhaps the most controversial, it had to include all types of preschool providers: private, public, nonprofit and home-based centers.

This is yet another example of a bad, if well-meant, initiative.  Three hours of state-funded daycare will do little for the poor Californian who needs full-time daycare so they can get to work.  It will instead be a nice bonus to wealthier Californians who can already afford to send their children to daycare.  Even worse, Milton Friedman will be overjoyed at this beachhead for school vouchers.

In fact, this initiative demonstrates the principal problem with the initiative process.  It does not allow for debate as to how best to raise and spend $2B on education.  Frankly, I would prefer that any additional money raised would be spent on improving the existing education system and not in creating a new entitlement.

Nick-- you are fixated on the immigration issue, so you drag it into every post, even those that don't mention it.  

You are a psychologically obsessive person.  It's just kind of sad-- and your need to keep posting the same vitriol over and over again is just a little bizarre.  

you are fixated on the immigration issue,

I'm fixated on the immigration issue? Newman's last couple posts have been on immigration and global trade. Hello?

I'm just rebutting the nonsense Newman keeps posting. I've said before I don’t know why Josh even allows such a crank as Newman on his site. Josh isn't for "open borders" nor do I suspect Josh has difficulty grasping how x-pats from the 3rd world ultimately help the 3rd world economic development such as India’s success story for example.

Newman's continued inability to address complex macro economic realities is what's "bizarre" about these exchanges. But then what else to expect from someone coming from the sheltered and intellectually inbred as the activist community of Newman, which has been on one long decline for decades.

For example of how silly Newman’s arguments are, one the greatest developments in 3rd world development has been “microcredit” which is due in large part to a Western trained economist x-pat of India, Muhammad Yunus. He began the successful microcredit bank  which has now spread across the globe helping tens of millions to a better life and issuing more than $5 Billion in loans and inspired many similar efforts. Additionally his model has been widly copied to help more people.

He began his bank from his own funds based on his insights and western economic training. Had he never left India to seek foreign training, had he never acquired the wealth to begin his microcredit banking, or had he listened to the traditional liberal activist dogmatically anti-capitalistic screed, one of the most successful 3rd world development programs would never have begun, and literally tens of millions of people would be worse off for it.

Newman and his confused un-economic theories follow a long tradition of incompetent activism of doing more harm than good. There are plenty of more sensible activists for good causes then the Newman Nonsense variety.

The website and pdf text of the preschool initiative.

Nick-- you are fixated on the immigration issue, so you drag it into every post, even those that don't mention it.   You are a psychologically obsessive person.  It's just kind of sad-- and your need to keep posting the same vitriol over and over again is just a little bizarre.

I wonder if it's possible to get NickDoe banned?

I think this country would be well advised to spend money on the falling high-school system of education here, specially in science, where it is well below that of the rising developing world.

What I see is a failing attitude towards parenting. Money to get rid of what is essentially a parent's job ....

Leadership in the world is slowly going to give away due to the selfish sef interests of this generation.

In fact, this initiative demonstrates the principal problem with the initiative process.

Across the country, we need a "tax the rich to help the American family" campaign that would fund not only pre-K education but paid family leave and better health care for all famillies.

This would be a disaster as a platform--and if the Democrats adopt it they'll end up on the scrap heap once again.

Americans want a strong safety net and programs to help balance work and family. But they also want those programs to be modest and affordable to the taxpayers. Most Americans believe that "tax the rich" really means "tax the middle class"--and they're not wrong, because there simply aren't enough rich people to cover the cost of all these programs, even if we tax them at very high rates.

The American people don't want what the Republicans offer: no social safety net and endless tax cuts for the rich. But they also don't want endless social programs and high taxes. They want something in-between: modest, efficient social programs and moderate taxes. Whichever party grabs this middle ground will win for years to come.

So sure, think about a pre-K program--but show how you can provide it at an affordable cost to all taxpayers. That'll get you much further than "soaking the rich."    

I agree regarding universal preschool.

Many in the middle class in Calif. can't afford private preschool, yet don't get state funded preschool, for their kids, while they pay more taxes to the state then the low class and immigrant low class i might add to a fairly large extent, who do get state funded preschool for their kids.

I'm not advocating cutting preschool for the lower class and immigrant lower class, that should and is the priority, I just think it's fair to offer it to everyone, or at least up through the middle class ranges.

Nick, you wrote: "Newman's last couple posts have been on immigration and global trade. Hello?"

I checked on this and it is not true. 

Nathan's last posts prior to yours were on:

The Costs of the Brain Drain (your point)
A Real Start on Health Care
More Attacks on Employer-Based Health Care
a post on trade and labor rights in China
a post on why he does not take free traders seriously

It looks as though only one of his last five posts was on immigration and global trade.

I don't think you do your cause good by making misstatements about what Nathan is doing.

If you want to disagree with him, fine, great.  The tenor of your attacks is overly personal to my way of thinking, though, certainly more personal than is necessary for you to make your points.  If you stick to offering reasoned criticism of those of his views you disagree with, without impuning Nathan per se, that would be an unambiguously positive contribution, I feel.