Indiana budget cuts threaten On My Way Pre-K
On My Way Pre-K provides state vouchers for quality, free preschool for 4-year-olds from income-eligible families.
Earlier this month, the Family and Social Services Administration announced it trimmed back the program because of a state budget shortfall.
Former Gov. Mike Pence signed legislation establishing the program as a pilot in 2014 and heralded its enrollment. Pence later flip-flopped back and forth on his willingness to take federal dollars saying he didn't like the 'strings attached.'
Under former Gov. Eric Holcomb, the program expanded statewide in 2019. With a voucher, children can attend participating private and public preschools authorized by the state.
Last year, the FSSA said On My Way Pre-K increased enrollment to about 6,200 students, with federal funding assistance.
By June, the FSSA said it would limit available seats in the program to 2,500 in the wake of a 10% budget cut.
Since 2017, the FSSA's Child Care and Development Fund has been a funding stream for On My Way to Pre-K, but recently it saw a funding decrease and now has a waitlist of 18,000 children waiting for an available subsidy.
GOP lawmakers pushed through early education cuts when a $2 billion budget deficit loomed because of a lowered revenue growth outlook, under President Donald Trump.
When the session began in January, Gov. Mike Braun sought $369 million for the Child Care and Development Fund and the doubling of funding for On My Way Pre-K. He also wanted to eliminate the CCDF waitlist.
The cuts worried early education providers and rankled one local House member.
'It's going to be impactful to a lot of children who won't have access,' said Karen Carradine, Head Start Geminus Vice President of Early Childhood Services.
Carradine said the state cuts won't impact Head Start but will make a big dent in state provider funding.
'It will tremendously reduce state vouchers and the funding to pay for the vouchers. In On My Way Pre-K, they've changed the rules,' she said explaining providers will have to pay 5%, possibly out-of-pocket.
'That's a big hurdle and children will get 46 weeks, instead of 52 they have to attend.
'I feel providers will be looking at how many they can serve. And at the end of the day, it comes down to dollars and cents,' she said.
The Gary Community School Corp. offers an On My Way Pre-K program at its Bethune Early Childhood Development Center.
Superintendent Yvonne Stokes said the district still isn't sure of the impact.
'We are committed to supporting any affected families by identifying other resources and means to help fill the gaps of any shortages,' she said.
Meanwhile, state Rep. Carolyn Jackson, D-Hammond, voiced concern Monday about the impact of the On My Way to Pre-K cuts.
'Over 85% of 4-year-olds in Indiana do not have access to preschool. On My Way Pre-K is already an extremely limited program to help the most vulnerable afford to send their children to pre-K.
'Now, 3,500 fewer Hoosier children will likely not be able to enroll in pre-K because their families cannot afford it without the voucher.'
Jackson, a member of the House Family, Children and Human Affairs Committee, said the financial incentive for providers to accept On My Way Pre-K vouchers decreased up to 46% in Lake County.
'Reducing this incentive will reduce class sizes even more. Families who desperately want to give their child a leg up with early childhood education are being left high and dry,' said Jackson who added Indiana was one of six states that don't fund universal Pre-K.
'If pre-K is a luxury that only wealthy families in well-off suburbs can afford, children living in underserved communities will be hurt the most,' said Jackson.
She criticized Republican lawmakers for cuts to early childhood education, but still green-lighting $1.2 billion to expand private school vouchers.
'This is not about fiscal responsibility. This does not help working Hoosiers. This policy is harmful for children, families and our economy,' Jackson said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Los Angeles Times
2 hours ago
- Los Angeles Times
In Trump's redistricting push, Democrats find an aggressive identity and progressives are on board
ATLANTA — Fight! Fight! Fight! It's not just Donald Trump's mantra anymore. As the Republican president pushes states to redraw their congressional districts to the GOP's advantage, Democrats have shown they are willing to go beyond words of outrage and use whatever power they do have to win. Democrats in the Texas Legislature started it off by delaying, for now, Republican efforts to expand the GOP majority in the state's delegation and help preserve party control of the U.S. House through new districts in time for the 2026 midterm elections. Then multiple Democratic governors promised new districts in their own states to neutralize potential Republican gains in Washington. Their counter has been buoyed by national fundraising, media blitzes and public demonstrations, including rallies scheduled around the country Saturday. 'For everyone that's been asking, 'Where are the Democrats?' Well, here they are,' said U.S. Rep. Jasmine Crockett of Texas, one of several Democrats who could be ousted under her state's new maps. 'For everyone who's been asking, 'Where is the fight?' Well, here it is.' There is no guarantee Democrats can prevent the Republican-powered redistricting, just as Democrats on Capitol Hill have not been able to stop Trump's moves. But it's a notable turn for a party that, as its leaders have long asserted, has honored conventional rules and bypassed bare-knuckled political tactics. So far, progressive and establishment Democrats are aligned, uniting what has often been a fragmented opposition since Republicans led by Trump took control of the federal government with their election sweep in November. Leaders on the left say the approach gives them a more effective way to confront him. They can challenge his redistricting ploy with tangible moves as they also counter the Republicans' tax and spending law and press the case that he is shredding American democracy. 'We've been imploring Democrats where they have power on the state and local level to flex that power,' said Maurice Mitchell, who leads the left-leaning Working Families Party. 'There's been this overwrought talk about fighters and largely performative actions to suggest that they're in the fight.' This time, he said, Democrats are 'taking real risks in protecting all of our rights' against 'an authoritarian president who only understands the fight.' Texas made sense for Republicans as the place to start a redistricting scuffle. They dominate the Statehouse, and Gov. Greg Abbott is a Trump loyalist. But when the president's allies announced a new political map intended to send five more Republicans to the U.S. House, state Democratic representatives fled Texas, denying the GOP the numbers to conduct business in the Legislature and approve the reworked districts. Those legislators surfaced in Illinois, New York, California and elsewhere, joined by governors, senators, state party chairs, other states' legislators and activists. All promised action. The response was almost Trumpian. Govs. Gavin Newsom of California, JB Pritzker of Illinois and Kathy Hochul of New York welcomed Texas Democrats and pledged retaliatory redistricting. Pritzker mocked Abbott as a lackey who says 'yes, sir' to Trump orders. Hochul dismissed Texas Republicans as 'lawbreaking cowboys.' Newsom's press office directed all-caps social media posts at Trump, mimicking the president's frequent sign-off: 'THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS MATTER.' U.S. Rep. Al Green, another Texas Democrat who could lose his seat, called Trump 'egomaniacal.' Yet many Democrats also claimed moral high ground, comparing their cause to the civil rights movement. Texas state Rep. Ramon Romero Jr. invoked another Texas Democrat, President Lyndon Johnson, who was 'willing to stand up and fight' for civil rights laws in the 1960s. Then, with Texas bravado, Romero reached further into history: 'We're asking for help, maybe just as they did back in the days of the Alamo.' A recent Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll found that about 15% of Democrats' own voters described the party using words like 'weak' or 'apathetic.' An additional 10% called it 'ineffective' or 'disorganized.' Beto O'Rourke, a former Texas congressman and onetime Democratic presidential candidate who is raising money to support Texas Democrats, has encouraged Democratic-run statehouses to redraw districts now rather than wait for GOP states to act. On Friday, California Democrats released a plan that could give the party an additional five U.S. House seats. It would require voter approval in a November election. 'Maximize Democratic Party advantage,' O'Rourke said at a recent rally. 'You may say to yourself, 'Well, those aren't the rules.' There are no refs in this game. F— the rules. ... Whatever it takes.' Democratic National Committee Chairman Ken Martin acknowledged the shift. 'This is not the Democratic Party of your grandfather, which would bring a pencil to a knife fight,' he said. Andrew O'Neill, an executive at the progressive group Indivisible, contrasted that response with the record-long speeches by U.S. Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) and the Democratic leader of the House, New York Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, in eviscerating Trump and his package of tax breaks and spending cuts. The left 'had its hair on fire' cheering those moments, O'Neill recalled, but were 'left even more frustrated in the aftermath.' Trump still secured tax cuts for the wealthy, accelerated deportations and cut safety net programs, just as some of his controversial nominees were confirmed over vocal Democratic opposition. 'Now,' O'Neill said, 'there is some marriage of the rhetoric we've been seeing since Trump's inauguration with some actual action.' O'Neill looked back wistfully to the decision by Senate Democrats not to eliminate the filibuster 'when our side had the trifecta,' so a simple majority could pass major legislation. Democratic President Biden's attorney general, Merrick Garland, O'Neill said, was too timid in prosecuting Trump and top associates over the Capitol riot and insurrection. In 2016, Democratic President Obama opted against hardball as the Senate's Republican leader, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, refused to consider Obama's nomination of Garland to the Supreme Court. McConnell's maneuver gave one additional Supreme Court appointee to the next president — Trump. 'These unspoken rules of propriety, especially on the Democratic side, have created the conditions' that enabled Trump, said Mitchell of the Working Families Party. Even on redistricting, Democrats would have to ignore their previous good-government efforts and bypass independent commissions that draw boundaries in several states, including California. Party leaders and activists rationalize that the broader fights tie together piecemeal skirmishes that may not, by themselves, sway voters. Arguing that Trump diminishes democracy stirs people who already support Democrats, O'Neill said. By contrast, he said, the GOP 'power grab' can be connected to unpopular policies that affect voters' lives. Rep. Green noted that Trump's big package bill cleared the Senate 'by one vote' and the House by a few, demonstrating why redistricting matters. U.S. Rep. Greg Casar of Texas said Democrats must make unseemly, short-term power plays so they can later pass legislation that 'bans gerrymandering nationwide ... bans super PACs [political action committees] and gets rid of that kind of big money and special interest that helped get us to this place.' Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas) added that a Democratic majority would wield subpoena power over Trump's administration. In the meantime, said Rep. Julie Johnson (D-Texas), voters are grasping a stark reality. 'They say, 'Well, I don't know. Politics doesn't affect me,'' she said of constituents she meets. 'I say, 'Honey, it does. If you don't do politics, politics will do you.'' Barrow writes for the Associated Press.
New York Post
2 hours ago
- New York Post
Insane energy policies are set to burn Democrats in New Jersey, New York
New York's state Public Service Commission just OK'd big National Grid rate increases that'll hike many upstate utility bills by $600 a year — fueling outrage Democrats will soon feel. Downstate, Con Edison is seeking an 11.4% hike to electric bills and 13.3% gas hike — largely thanks to green-energy mandates that Gov. Kathy Hochul embraced along with the rest of the party. The 'climate agenda' is delivering pain we've long warned of, in New York and New Jersey. Advertisement Con Edison is seeking an 11.4% hike to electric bills and 13.3% gas hike — largely thanks to green-energy mandates that Gov. Kathy Hochul embraced along with the rest of the party. Jack Forbes / NY Post Design Across the Hudson, electric bills as much as tripled this summer — and could cost Democrats the Jersey governor's race. 'Once they realize that Democrats' bungled energy policies are to blame for their exploding utility bills as well, it could blow November's race wide open,' warned Bethany Mandel last week. Yes, GOP Gov. Chris Christie shares in the blame for the Garden State's madness, but it started with the Democrats before him and accelerated under Dem Gov. Phil Murphy, who let the Oyster Creek nuclear power plant close in 2018 and aggressively shut down fossil fuel-powered electricity sources. Advertisement New York's worst-in-the-nation Climate Action Plan began under Gov. Andrew Cuomo but then Hochul doubled down on closing reliable natural-gas power plants and pretending expensive — and less reliable — solar and offshore wind installations could not only replace them, but make up for growing electric demand. Both states are using more electricity than ever — even as 'decarbonization' prevented supply from growing to match. Even without soaring power demands for data centers and AI, green policies that push ever-more consumers to need electricity for cooking, home heating and vehicles put added strain on the grid. Advertisement Hochul's belated push for new nuclear reactors upstate comes too late to stop the crunch; even 'clean power' advocates admit the high risk will cause chaos for New York's power grid. Democrats who locked both states into this idiocy certainly should pay the political price. Murphy barely won re-election in 2021; Hochul came shocking close to losing in 2022 — and all the issues that boosted Republicans then remain. Now Democratic policies are delivering soaring utility bills in both states — and voters will know who to blame.
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
The rich already know how private equity mints money — and it's not from a 401(k)
The ultrawealthy are envied for many reasons. For instance, we wish we could access the same private-market investments that they favor. Now, after the White House issued an executive order on Aug. 7, you may be able to invest like the billionaires do. Homeowners rush to refinance as mortgage-rate plunge opens window of opportunity My wife and I are in our 50s and have $11 million. We're not leaving it to our kids. Is that wrong? You could receive up to $7,500 from the AT&T settlement. Here's how class-action suits work. But would you want to? The executive order allows ordinary retirement savers to invest in private assets and cryptocurrency. This will expand investment options for anyone with a 401(k) or similar tax-advantaged retirement plan. It is a big deal — opening part of America's $12.4 trillion defined-contribution market to private-asset managers. The largest private-equity firms and other asset managers are salivating at the opportunity to pitch this untapped market of retirement savers. Private assets encompass a range of investments that do not trade on a public exchange. Examples include hedge funds, private equity, private credit and infrastructure. The case for private assets is they can provide a buffer against inflation — plus steady returns. The downsides include high fees, illiquidity and complexity. The nation's biggest asset managers welcome the executive order. They want to develop funds that make private assets easier for people to buy, and argue that the added diversification serves savers' best interests. Larry Fink, chief executive of BlackRock BLK, says retirement savers should replace the traditional 60% stocks/40% bonds asset-allocation model with a 50/30/20 split: 50% stocks, 30% bonds and 20% private assets. Read: Larry Fink proposes an alternative to the 60/40 portfolio. It means more fees. Should you be excited about this widening menu of investment choices? It depends on whom you ask. Some investment professionals like the idea of making private assets more available to more people. 'Historically, a number of private-market strategies have produced higher performance and additional diversification in defined-benefit pensions,' says Peter von Lehe, head of investment solutions and strategy at Neuberger Berman. 'It's appropriate that a broader range of investors have access to private assets in their defined-contribution plans because of the potential for return and diversification that these long-term investments can provide.' However, von Lehe cautions that these investments are illiquid and 'have a higher degree of complexity.' He says his 'most appropriate use case' for private-market investments is through professionally managed target-date funds or other funds that allocate a percentage of defined-contribution money to these complex but potentially more lucrative alternatives. Read: Here's something the rich know about managing investment risk that can help you, too Financial advisers have differing views on the role of private assets in client portfolios. Steven Roge, a certified financial planner in Bohemia, N.Y., says private markets are not for everyone. 'It's for people in the wealth-accumulation phase, say 40 to 50 years old, who have a long time horizon and a high risk tolerance,' Roge says. 'And they have to be sophisticated enough to understand it. We know if they don't understand it, they may not stick with it.' Of the firm's 300 clients, he says that 'only about a dozen' fit the bill for adding private-market assets to their retirement accounts. Even with the expanded investment options that may result from the White House's action, Roge remains a fan of passive strategies for most investors. 'Indexing is how they will win over the long run,' he says. 'But some clients want something that's special and different' as they seek market-beating returns. Given the illiquidity of private assets, Roge anticipates setting expectations for those clients who tend to monitor their portfolio daily — and who engage in frequent trading. 'These private investments may only price four times a year,' Roge says. 'That's not enough action for certain clients who track their portfolio like a hawk.' In his personal portfolio, Roge uses private markets — especially private equity — to diversify his holdings. He says he allocates about 25% to alternative assets. 'It helps me sleep at night knowing my portfolio isn't being pushed around by the volatility of public markets,' he says. Roge adds that he is not concerned about the current high valuations of private-equity funds. 'The valuations [of private-equity funds] are more realistic than the erratic valuations we see in public markets on a daily basis,' he says. Other advisers are more skeptical of the White House executive order. 'It's less being done out of interest for the general public and more for private industry lobbying the [Trump] administration,' says Alex Ruda, an adviser in Silver Spring, Md. The executive order undoubtedly pleases asset managers and private-equity firms. For years, they've wanted to attract retirement savers' money. These savers bear primary responsibility for managing their 401(k) compared with today's older retirees, many of whom receive employer-funded defined-benefit pensions. While some younger savers enjoy picking their investments, others dread it. 'The average American worker isn't equipped to navigate these complex [private-market] investments,' Ruda says. 'And they may fall prey to a little performance chasing given where we are in the market cycle' — as private markets have outperformed publicly traded stocks since 2000. Ruda feels so strongly about not incorporating private assets into client portfolios that he's willing to forgo newcomers who express such interest. 'If I wanted to broaden my client base, I'd have to play to what they want,' he says. 'But I don't have to do that. So I'd say to them, 'I'm not the best fit.'' Read next: Here's what it's like to invest in private equity — and why you don't want it in your 401(k) More: As private equity enters retirement plans, is it too dangerous for average investors to jump in? I'm a senior who barely survives on $1,300 a month. No way could I live on $1,000. 'I am a senior citizen': My car needs $3,500 for repairs, but only has a trade-in value of $6,000. Do I bother fixing it?
