Thread: Pres. Bush may support war but he doesn't support our children!!!!!

And Clinton cared so much more about our kids? He was too busy diddling his intern with a high priced cigar I too think headstart is a good progam, but why is it just for the lower income? I pay taxes too and we don't qualify for it. I think it should be replaced by a progam that benefits all children, not just some. Maybe that is what he plans to implement, who knows? His family is very active in literacy progams so I don't see him just dropping the whole progam without an alternative.

Originally posted by luceones
I too think headstart is a good progam, but why is it just for the lower income? I pay taxes too and we don't qualify for it.

From: http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/hsb/about/history.htm

HEAD START HISTORY

In 1964, the Federal Government asked a panel of child development experts to draw up a program to help communities meet the needs of disadvantaged preschool children.. The panel report became the blueprint for Project Head Start.

Project Head Start, launched as an eight-week summer program by the Office of Economic Opportunity in 1965, was designed to help break the cycle of poverty by providing preschool children of low-income families with a comprehensive program to meet their emotional, social, health, nutritional, and psychological needs. Recruiting children age three to school entry age, Head Start was enthusiastically received by education, child development specialists, community leaders, and parents across the Nation. Head Start serves children and their families each year in urban and rural areas in all 50 States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Territories, including many American Indians and migrant children.

In 1969, Head Start was transferred from the Office of Economic Opportunity to the Office of Child Development in the U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, and has now become a program within the Administration on Children, Youth and Families in the Department of Health and Human Services. A well-established, though still an innovative program, Head Start has had a strong impact on communities and early childhood program across the country.

The program is locally administered by community-based non-profit organizations and school systems. Grants are awarded by the Department of Health and Human Services Regional offices, except for the American Indian and Migrant programs, which are administered in Washington, D.C.

Your taxes pay for a lot of things you don't get to use. That's just the way it goes.

Originally posted by luceones
And Clinton cared so much more about our kids? He was too busy diddling his intern with a high priced cigar I too think headstart is a good progam, but why is it just for the lower income? I pay taxes too and we don't qualify for it. I think it should be replaced by a progam that benefits all children, not just some. Maybe that is what he plans to implement, who knows? His family is very active in literacy progams so I don't see him just dropping the whole progam without an alternative.

May be true about Clinton, but I don't think the $$ for the cigar came out of the Head Start budget.

Anyway, Bush is already trying to undermine the Head Start funding by "experimenting" with a block grant to some of the states. In other words, the feds give the Head Start money to the states, and the states get to do whatever they want with it.

I know it's frustrating seeing low-income families get free services, but unfortunately it's more important to line the pockets of our nation's CEO's than to make sure all kids get the education and services that they need.

I don't even get into the Democrat vs Republican debate...both parties are whores for big business anymore. I vote alternative every chance I get!

Speaking of...just got this in my email:

Just For Parents

A Newsletter from NHSA’s Government Affairs Division
September 2003

Please circulate this document to all Head Start parents

The Senate is now drafting legislation for Head Start reauthorization. Please continue your advocacy efforts to ensure Head Start’s survival and adequate funding.
Some senators would like to see a bi-partisan effort (both parties working together) go into drafting the future of Head Start. Suggestions are to fully fund Head Start within the next five years and to provide double funding for Early Head Start.
On September 10, 2003, Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) offered an amendment to increase Head Start funding by $350 million. This would have allowed 36,000 additional children to enter Head Start, but the amendment failed by a vote of 47 to 47. Six senators were recorded as absent during time of the vote. NHSA commends Sen. Dodd and his colleagues for their efforts to increase Head Start funding from the $148 million increase proposed by the Bush administration. The proposed $148 million does not allow any additional children to enter Head Start.
It is important that the Head Start community do their part to ensure that Head Start remains intact and adequately funded. Please contact your senators and thank them for their support. Urge your senator to:
· Introduce legislation that will improve Head Start.
· Maintain the federal-to-local funding structure of Head.
· Provide adequate funding for Head Start.
A recent poll conducted by PAX World Funds (a socially responsible mutual fund family) shows a broad bipartisan support for Head Start as it is operated today. Most who were surveyed support expanding Head Start services to more eligible children. View results of the poll at www.saveheadstart.org
There is still time to register for the October 1-4, 2003, Leadership Conference at the Gateway Crystal City Marriott in Arlington, Virginia. Visit www.nhsa.org for more information and registration details.
Don’t forget our monthly parent conference calls the third Wednesday of each month at 8:30 p.m. eastern time. The number for the call is (888) 457-6338, and the pass code is 5722#.
We look forward to having parents take part in these important leadership events.

Originally posted by schsa
He's a Republician, and that should answer your question.Republicians do not care about programs that help children. They could care less about social problems. They are all about big business. So if you want Head Start to be funded, vote him out of office.

I think this is an unfair statement. Not all Republicians are/feel this way.

Just one piece of info to add on...even if a family is "over-income", if the child has some type of learning problem or a disability, they may still qualify for Head Start services.

Originally posted by Fireball
uh, yes, he did.
IF all you know about the 8 years of the Clinton presidency is "the cigar story" you've been in the dark for a long time.
Clinton inproved the standard of living for all people, rich and poor.
Our standard of living was never higher (and has since gone DOWN under Bush II).
Clinton cares very deeply about kids, his vision included improving nutrition, health care and education for children.

It would be hard to read anything about Bill Clinton and not know how much he cares about kids.

The whole point of Head Start is that kids from disadvantaged families need a little head start to catch up with the kids from middle class families when they get in school. Your kids don't need it 'cause they come from homes that can afford books, etc. Head Start is for families that can't afford books, etc., which keeps the kids behind when they get to school. Head Start doesn't give them an advantage over your kids--your kids already have that advantage by virtue of your middle-class life. Head Start just helps the kids try to catch up with your kids so they don't keep getting left behind.

The funny thing is the BIGGEST subsidies in this nation are for businesses. Sure it does good (encourages investment) as does Head Start, but you never hear anyone complaining that they pay taxes for it and don't get to benefit.

No one ever complains about the millions in subsidies for General Dynamics but would greedily snatch a 50-cent cup of milk out of the hands of a starving child.

sad

I agree totally with Fireball on this issue
I voted for him (Clinton),if he would have been able to run for a third term,I would have voted for him again. He really improved health care and education for children,this is only one of the reasons why I voted for him.As for the cigar,he was our president yes, but he was also human,he did have faults,his faults made him more likeable to alot of people.He can also play a mean sax

Clinton may have cheated on his wife but so have a lot of other men but because they aren't in the public eye no one makes a big deal out of it. I don't care what Clinton did with his intern, he made a pretty good president. He did a better job than the buffoon who is president now will ever do.