If you want a good example of job creation by the government, look into the field of Early Childhood Education.
Perennial studies of “poor children” and their achievement gaps, are always cropping up to provide the Left with a bouquet of social programs. Which of course, translates into job security and a moral platform for the Left, but fails to improve the lives of the children they are designed to help.
Another new study is out, which plays right into the leftist agenda of Marian Wright Edelman, President of the Children’s Defense Fund, who uses “at risk” children as her vehicle of choice for social “change”.
Edelman highlights the “need” for early state intervention—beginning at birth, in the Huffington Post.
“…[W]e should acknowledge that if differences economic in development can already be detected as early as nine and 24 months, interventions also need to start as early as infancy. They note research suggests that in addition to children ages three to five, children ages zero to three also need high-quality, comprehensive and continuous interventions.”
Actually, what children need from ages zero to three is good mothering and a father in the home; not state intervention. But then, how could that bring about social change?
“Disparities in Early Learning and Development: Lessons from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study – Birth Cohort,” was funded by the Council of Chief State School Officers. It found that gaps in child development are already apparent when babies are just nine months old, and grow even larger by 24 months.”
In comparing the disparities by family income, researchers found that infants and toddlers from poor families scored lower for behavior and good health thus the need for early intervention.
Could it be underlying social issues that cause lower incomes, which would also contribute to conditions which hinder child development within a family? Such as one parent households, drug and alcohol use, mothers that co-habitat with non-family members. These are parents who are typically not fully aware of the needs of their children.
From the study:
“Toddlers from lower-income families are also less likely to have a secure attachment to their primary caregiver compared to toddlers from higher-income families. In addition to their scores on the positive behavior index, the odds of having a secure attachment are 44 percent less for toddlers from lower-income families compared to toddlers from higher-income families.”
Social conservatives have fought the battle for “family” values to the point the term has become almost cliché, but this is where it plays out with real children. This is also where leftists gain ground within government, and the government gains grounds into the family.
The Left sees the poor and disparages the government for not doing enough to help their plight. They call for earlier intervention in the name of saving money down the road on remedial education and prisons. Sounds compassionate and responsible, but it is nothing more than a platform for a leftist agenda. An agenda that brushes parents aside in favor of institutions and government programs.
In truth, this agenda keeps families in poverty, and marginalizes if not negates mothers.
In spite of all their empowerment rhetoric, the Left will never tell mothers that their children desperately need them. Nor that their most basic instincts of nurturing are vital and superior to any program the left has to offer. Her income status means nothing to a baby at the breast.
The promise is always to save the children, and taxpayers’ money down the road, but it’s always the children who pay the most.