Battle lines drawn over preschool changes

The battle lines were drawn early and changed little as Iowa House Education Committee members skirmished Monday over the future of preschool for 4-year-olds.

After a Monday morning subcommittee meeting that was, by all accounts, testy, the committee resumed a sharp-edged discussion of preschool and how to fund it, before voting shortly before 10 p.m. 12-10 along party lines to send House Study Bill 145 to the full House.

The current preschool program, which Democrats have billed as universal and free, isn't universal and while free for 4-year-olds, the price tag is more than the state can afford, Chairman Greg Forristall, R-Macedonia, told committee members.

“With the state facing a $700 million gap between spending and revenues, the current preschool program is on a rising cost curve that is not sustainable.”

Preschool will cost the state $70 million in fiscal 2012, Forristall said, but increase to more than $100 million annually in a few years.

The state already is having difficulty meeting its commitments to K-12 education “and now we think we can add $80 million to $100 million for preschool?”

The respective philosophies of Democrats and Republicans regarding the size and scope of government aside, Rep. Nate Willems, D-Lisbon, questioned why Republicans were intent on throwing out a “perfectly good program.”

“With all due respect to our Republican colleagues, once in awhile it seems Republicans take the attitude ‘Government doesn't work and we intend to prove it,'” he said. “I understand the money, the different philosophies, but that doesn't explain why we're re-inventing (preschool.) We could keep some continuity rather than improvising.”

Forristall disagreed with Democrats' assertion the state has a $900 million surplus that would be better spent on preschool rather than on Republican-sponsored tax cuts.

“The best stimulus we can have for the economy, best thing we can do for citizens is to have a tax structure is as fair and minimal as possible,” he said.

During the three years it has spent $150 million on the preschool program the state has shorted K-12 education $450 million, he said.

“Let's get our house in order,” Forristall said. “If your house is missing a wall on the north side, you don't put a fancy new entryway on the front.”

The Republican plan, however, would tear down the house, said Rep. Cindy Winckler, D-Davenport.

“It will reduce access to both public and private preschools for families while giving parents no guarantee of quality instruction with no certified teacher,” Winckler said. “With strong support from business leaders, educators, and parents who understand that it raises student achievement and saves the state money in the long run, Republicans clearly are not listening to the people of Iowa.”

They may be having trouble hearing Gov. Terry Branstad, too.

The House Republican plan for preschool would appropriate about $10 million less than the $43.6 million the GOP governor wants to provide scholarships to low-income families who send their children to 4-year-old preschool.

“Thirty-three million dollars won't get us as far as the governor wants,” said his special adviser on education, Linda Fandel. She called HSB 145 “a starting point.”

The lower funding means that rather than scholarships up to $3,000 per child, the cap on scholarships – Democrats call them vouchers – would be $2,300, Forristall said.

House Speaker Kraig Paulsen, R-Hiawatha, said Monday it was clear “the House Republican caucus was on one spot on preschool and (Branstad) was on another.”

However, Paulsen added, “We've worked through some of that and they've incorporated some of our ideas in their proposal.”

Fandel agreed that other than the funding, HSB 145 and the governor's proposal are virtually the same.

The preschool program was a jewel in Democrats' legislative crown when they controlled the House, Senate and governor's office. They are reluctant to allow the new GOP House majority and governor change it.

Discussion on the bill, which was introduced a week ago, was combative during a subcommittee meeting Feb. 24. A subcommittee meeting Monday morning was by all accounts testy.

Monday afternoon, Democrats said they had not had enough time to fully analyze the bill and prepare for a full committee discussion. After introductory remarks, Democrats met for about three hours before the committee reconvened.