2015-16 MN Legislative Session & Budget

[acs]

I would actually trust Bakk and Daudt to be able to work out a good deal if it was just them negotiating, but unfortunately there's Dayton to deal with and he's pretty much just Education Minnesota's puppet. The first two seem to recognize that there are actually other funding priorities in this state that need far more attention than padding teacher pensions and universal daycare, even with a projected surplus.

http://www.startribune.com/as-budget-ta ... 303359581/

[David Greene]

Universal daycare is extremely important. It is the most critical time in the development of a child and anything we can do to improve learning during that period is going to reap huge rewards.

I agree that Dayton is a little myopic when it comes to policy (he still doesn't understand transportation) but this is one area where I wholeheartedly support his education agenda.

[phop]

Also, it's universal pre-school, not universal daycare.

[David Greene]

Also, it's universal pre-school, not universal daycare.

Whoops, quite right. I was thinking of universal preschool, not daycare.

[xandrex]

Though his proposal for universal pre-school has been called "daycare" by critics of the plan. I assumed that was acs's intention.

[mattaudio]

I'm a huge believer in the value of early childhood education, having followed the work of Art Rolnick for years.

That said, I've heard some criticism of the current plan that I don't necessarily know how to respond to. People are concerned that this is a way to institutionalize younger children and usurp parental involvement at even earlier ages. Even though that seems like a cynical way of viewing the issue, I can understand why some see it that way. But the reality is that many parents aren't able to stay home and give their children the development time they need. I'd like to see us *also* work to enable parental involvement *alongside* additional early childhood investments. Things like paid parental leave, minimum wage increase, and other livability factors should give more parents more time to invest in their children's future.

[LakeCharles]

Dollars spent on preschool have some of the best "return" you could possibly get. The state will assuredly be better off in 20 years if we spent money on this than almost anything else. So if Dayton is going to be myopic, this is a good thing to focus on.

[David Greene]

I'd like to see us *also* work to enable parental involvement *alongside* additional early childhood investments. Things like paid parental leave, minimum wage increase, and other livability factors should give more parents more time to invest in their children's future.

Absolutely. There is no silver bullet for education. Almost every other aspect of society plays into it.

[MNdible]

It seems like the question is whether we provide $X of additional funding so that lower to middle income children have access to private or public preschool options, or whether we provide $4X of additional funding to make preschool free for everybody (including middle to upper income children whose parents can probably afford it anyway) and make it a part of the K-12 system.

I definitely support the former, but probably not the latter. It's telling that there are lots of progressives who have spoken out against Dayton's plan.

[David Greene]

It seems like the question is whether we provide $X of additional funding so that lower to middle income children have access to private or public preschool options, or whether we provide $4X of additional funding to make preschool free for everybody (including middle to upper income children whose parents can probably afford it anyway) and make it a part of the K-12 system.

I definitely support the former, but probably not the latter. It's telling that there are lots of progressives who have spoken out against Dayton's plan.

I definitely understand your position. I'm sure there are plenty of well-off parents who don't send their kids to preschool and the kids suffer for it. Perhaps the answer is to mandate preschool and provide funding for the less well-off.

[EOst]

It seems like the question is whether we provide $X of additional funding so that lower to middle income children have access to private or public preschool options, or whether we provide $4X of additional funding to make preschool free for everybody (including middle to upper income children whose parents can probably afford it anyway) and make it a part of the K-12 system.

Wouldn't that just lead to economic segregation? I know that isn't as much an issue for earlier grades as it is once you get into middle school and up, but keep in mind too that it'd be a lot easier for a future Republican administration to cut "those poor folks' free daycare" than everyone's.

[MNdible]

Maybe. I believe the children are our future, teach them well and let them lead the way.

That said, I don't have kids and don't plan to. So the prospect of me paying a lot more in taxes so rich people can send their kids to preschool for free is unappealing.

Also, if you're looking for a way to tar-and-feather Republicans as uncaring no-sayers, I can't think of a better way than pointing out that they're trying to kick poor kids out of preschool. That seems to me like an election loser, and I think most smart Republicans would realize that.

[EOst]

Sure, but paying for things you don't necessarily use yourself is the price of a civil society. I mean, the same argument you're making could be equally made for charging for normal K-12 school, and I think we can agree that would lead to some pernicious outcomes in the end.

And that would be great, but Republicans haven't paid that price for all the other heartless things they say. I mean, there are prominent Republicans openly hoping that the Supreme Court takes away health insurance subsidies for millions of people, and they just won in a landslide.

[MNdible]

Sure, but paying for things you don't necessarily use yourself is the price of a civil society. I mean, the same argument you're making could be equally made for charging for normal K-12 school, and I think we can agree that would lead to some pernicious outcomes in the end.

That's certainly true, and I'm usually not one to bitch about paying taxes. But following that line of reasoning, you can look at a lot of things that government doesn't currently do, but that some people think they should. Daycare was mentioned above -- providing free daycare for everybody would be a nice thing. Maybe after-school programs for everybody? That would probably be a benefit for society. You've got to draw the line somewhere, and to me it doesn't make sense to subsidize something that well-off folks are currently paying for.

If the goal is to ensure that all kids have access to quality preschool, there are much more affordable ways to do this than universal state-sponsored preschool. It was mentioned above, but given Dayton's tendencies, I'm pretty suspicious that this is in large part a sop to Education Minnesota.

[mattaudio]

So. Is it looking like "No Transportation Bill" in exchange for "No Tax Cuts" is a likely outcome this week?

[xandrex]

I definitely understand your position. I'm sure there are plenty of well-off parents who don't send their kids to preschool and the kids suffer for it. Perhaps the answer is to mandate preschool and provide funding for the less well-off.

Mandated pre-school seems a bit extreme. And to then means test it can't help sell it politically. We've certainly struggled with that issue in health insurance.

I'm kind of curious how a limited approach (non-universal) to pre-K is different from Head Start? Surely expanding accessibility to that existing program would be a better option (though obviously it's a federal thing, so maybe that's not possible...I just hate the idea of duplicating services).

[twincitizen]

So. Is it looking like "No Transportation Bill" in exchange for "No Tax Cuts" is a likely outcome this week?

Not quite. There will be tax cuts (though not killing MNsure), and there will be increased transportation funding (though probably no gas tax), just likely very little of either.

This is probably going to turn out to be very accurate: http://www.minnpost.com/politics-policy ... might-look

We know the GOP wants to take "we stopped the gas tax" back to their constituents. The real burning question for transit advocates is "will the DFL continue to push a transit sales tax without the gas tax component?" The answer is...maybe (if you're asking Scott Dibble or Governor Dayton) and probably "no" if you're asking anyone outside of the urban/inner-suburban core. Thus far, the DFL has not been willing to push a transit sales tax without a "comprehensive" long-term solution for funding roads & bridges too. With the GOP looking to be very close to winning that gas tax battle, it would be great to know where Bakk and Dayton stand on the transit sales tax.

[acs]

Man Myopic zeal was an understatement. Ed MN I mean Governor Dayton will veto the whole budget compromise over his/the union's pet project of universal preschool.

http://www.startribune.com/dayton-stand ... 304053321/

His belief that the house would get the blame are pretty far off the mark IMO, considering that his initiative didn't even pass the DFL senate and in the end negotiations both chambers were willing to greatly expand vouchers and scholarships. It's pretty selfish to think the Governor has the power to write legislation with the veto pen.

Oh and if it wasn't obvious Bakk and the senate are taking the long view and banking as much of the "surplus" as they can to use it to cut a grand bargain on transportation and taxes next session, but that apparently went way over Dayton's head.

[VAStationDude]

As long as we're questioning motives instead of discussing the merits of policy, I'll remind you one of the house republicans main priorities is giving massive tax breaks to extraordinary rich heirs whose parents couldn't spend their wealth under $2 million.

By all means attack people making $50,000 doing a tough and important job. If you can convince more people teachers are the root of evil maybe Minnesota will end up an economic power house like out neighbors to the east.

[VAStationDude]

Btw, Dayton is a fucking ass kicker. He won two elections on a platform of higher taxes, fiscal sanity and better education. An unabashed liberal candidate winning twice in non presidential election years is no push over. The gop house has proven they're incapable of governing. Zellers was a complete dolt and Daudt is as good at governing as he is choosing friends http://m.startribune.com/239625961.html