What The Election Of Hogan Means For Prince George's County (home, preschool)

[AeroGuyDC]

Originally Posted by bufflove

Thanks for making my point, again. As I said, most everyone is in favor of the line. A handful of wealthy Chevy Chase NIMBYs is the biggest anti-PL group out there, which speaks volumes to its near-universal appeal among affected residents, their political representation, and business interests. Those Chevy Chase NIMBYs are a punchline in every article on the issue. You should see how much crap they get on BethesdaNow and Bethesda Magazine articles.

But that's not your argument. Your assertion was that the Purple Line would rapidly become a single issue that would galvanize voters to get rid of Hogan if he bailed on the Purple Line project. You competely forget that Hogan's stance on the Purple Line was not enough to get people to the polls in the first place to deny him a win on Tuesday. You are engaging in wishful thinking if you think that the average-no-Metro-riding wealthy MoCo citizen really gives a rat's behind about the Purple Line. If they did, they would have rallied for Brown on November 4th. They didn't.

[bufflove]

Originally Posted by AeroGuyDC

But that's not your argument. Your assertion was that the Purple Line would rapidly become a single issue that would galvanize voters to get rid of Hogan if he bailed on the Purple Line project. You competely forget that Hogan's stance on the Purple Line was not enough to get people to the polls in the first place to deny him a win on Tuesday. You are engaging in wishful thinking if you think that the average-no-Metro-riding wealthy MoCo citizen really gives a rat's behind about the Purple Line. If they did, they would have rallied for Brown on November 4th. They didn't.

Right, I think we agree the PL wasn't on many people's radar for this election. But, if a 180 occurs and this "done deal" of a project gets scuttled, I don't think there's any way that goes unnoticed by PG, MoCo and Baltimore (assuming the Balt. redline also gets nuked) voters, not to mention various special interest/business groups in favor of the PL. Maybe no one will care and him getting rid of the projects doesn't affect his reelection chances, but I highly doubt it and I also doubt Hogan would take that risk.

Anyways, I still think this is all a moot point. Hogan throwing away over a $100m already spent on the PL and snubbing his nose at a billion dollars more in federal aid doesn't make sense, especially since he's supposedly pro-growth/pro-business and ran on becoming economically competitive with NoVa and DC - both of which have recently invested heavily in mass transit to attract new residents and employers. I really can't envision Hogan standing in the way of these projects and the growth that accompanies them. It doesn't add up, politically, and it doesn't add up when considering his pro-business/pro-growth developer background. I'd be really surprised if he cancels the projects and even more surprised if MoCo/PG/Baltimore voters shrugged their shoulders about it.

[KatSRVA]

Originally Posted by adelphi_sky

Free pre-K has an invaluable return on investment. I'd be willing to pay more taxes if it meant that kids would start learning earlier which would help improve our schools. And the $700 - $1000/month savings per child wouldn't be bad either.

Could you provide a source on why this would be a great investment? Not picking a fight, just curious about how this conclusion has been reached. How is that savings figure determined? I'd love to read the research. Thanks.

[justtitans]

One thing that should be also noted in this thread. Hogan has roots in PG County. His father was the last Republican County Executive in PG. Certainly he has a sentimental connection with the county.

[adelphi_sky]

Originally Posted by KatSRVA

Could you provide a source on why this would be a great investment? Not picking a fight, just curious about how this conclusion has been reached. How is that savings figure determined? I'd love to read the research. Thanks.

Savings for parents who can't afford daycare and can't afford to stay home to watch their kids.

Childcare for preschoolers
Costs for daycare for preschool-age children are generally lower, averaging $8,800 a year ($733 a month). Depending on where you live, you'll pay anywhere from $4,460 to $13,185 a year ($371 to $1,100 a month).

The most expensive states for preschool-age care in a childcare center, with costs over $8,000 a year ($667 a month), beginning with the most expensive, are Massachusetts, New York, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Rhode Island, Colorado, and Pennsylvania..

Best And Most Affordable Preschools In the DC Area « CBS DC

Future impacts on the community at large.

Experts, studies clash on benefits of pre-K - NY Daily News

High-quality pre-k programs also provide substantial cost savings to federal, state, and local governments. Numerous studies have shown a reduced use of special education services and lower grade retention among pre-k participants. In the Abecedarian study, for example, 24 percent of pre-k children received special education services, versus 48 percent of the control group. Given the high cost of these interventions pre-k can produce significant financial benefits for school districts.

Economic analyses have sought to quantify these and other societal outcomes (i.e., less delinquency, decreased dependence on public assistance, increased employment and earnings) in real dollars. Table 1 shows the cost benefits per $1 invested for each of three long-term pre-k studies.

- See more at: http://www.centerforpubliceducation.....fZL8OUju.dpuf

Why All Children Benefit from Pre-K

http://fcd-us.org/sites/default/file...on%20FINAL.pdf

[bluevisor]

Originally Posted by Trace21230

No offense, but the D.C. liberals in PG and Montgomery can go to H. E. double hockey sticks.

That's not very nice. You do realize the tax income from those people disproportionately subsidizes the roads, schools, and public services in the rest of the state? Would you seriously rather live without them?

[North Beach Person]

Originally Posted by adelphi_sky

Savings for parents who can't afford daycare and can't afford to stay home to watch their kids.

Best And Most Affordable Preschools In the DC Area « CBS DC

Future impacts on the community at large.

Experts, studies clash on benefits of pre-K - NY Daily News



- See more at: The Research on Pre-K

Why All Children Benefit from Pre-K

http://fcd-us.org/sites/default/file...on%20FINAL.pdf

For your first part, that's part of the problem, schools have become surrogate parents for kids at younger and younger ages.

For the rest, Pre-K is beneficial for a sub-set of students. Whatever name you wish to use, those typically considered in the underclass with parents who have little or no education or parenting skills. Once you move up the economic ladder the benefits shrink until they finally disappear.

That's why "universal" hits people the wrong way. I don't know what the per pupil number is in just Prince George's but multiply that by the number of 3 and 4 year olds in the County while keeping in mind that 70% of the current students in the school system receive FARM.

[justtitans]

Originally Posted by North Beach Person

For your first part, that's part of the problem, schools have become surrogate parents for kids at younger and younger ages.

For the rest, Pre-K is beneficial for a sub-set of students. Whatever name you wish to use, those typically considered in the underclass with parents who have little or no education or parenting skills. Once you move up the economic ladder the benefits shrink until they finally disappear.

That's why "universal" hits people the wrong way. I don't know what the per pupil number is in just Prince George's but multiply that by the number of 3 and 4 year olds in the County while keeping in mind that 70% of the current students in the school system receive FARM.

It seems like a good idea but there are so many negative consequences to sending children to pre-school. As I have watched my own children have their experiences in pre-school I have seen the good and bad in it. Let's be honest, Obama has already gotten in trouble by in a roundabout way suggesting that SAHMs are a bad thing, but honestly I think it should be a choice not a means to an end. It's no surprise that Brown has some similar views on this.

What we are doing are creating more ways to keep parents away from their kids and to be able to influenced even more by society. There is no better teacher for a child than their mother, or father in some cases if they stay at home. People think this sounds nice but it's also, once again, creating a dependency on the government. What is really so bad abut a mother wanting to be at home with her child? What is okay with our country becoming so expensive that women have almost no choice but to work instead if at least having an option to stay at home?

[justtitans]

Funding pre-school....

MSNBC Host Melissa Harris-Perry » All Your Kids Belong To Us - YouTube

Many of these individuals are saying similar things. It's not as innocent as it is being presented.

[EdwardA]

Originally Posted by adelphi_sky

Free pre-K has an invaluable return on investment. I'd be willing to pay more taxes if it meant that kids would start learning earlier which would help improve our schools. And the $700 - $1000/month savings per child wouldn't be bad either.

It actually doesn't according to studies, effects wear off around 2nd grade. However it makes people feel good and think they are doing something. So it's a popular program.