Thursday, June 15, 2006
More discussion about the Governor's recent line item veto of the Quality Rating System.
In the Minneapolis Star Tribune: link
Editorial: A puzzling veto on early education
Governor's critique of quality measures doesn't add up.
Published: June 07, 2006
It was heartening when Gov. Tim Pawlenty threw his support behind a package of early-childhood proposals in the Legislature last winter -- they represented a set of prudent investments and they needed the governor's support against a camp of social conservatives who seem to yearn for the days when every toddler just stayed home with Mom.So it's all the more frustrating that last Friday, after lawmakers went home, Pawlenty vetoed a crucial element of the child-care package. The veto sends a mixed message about the state's commitment to education and it represents another missed opportunity in Minnesota's efforts to stay competitive in the human-capital economy.
The item that Pawlenty vetoed was small -- a pilot project to grade child-care providers on quality -- and it represented just $1 million in a $23 million package with many other fine elements. But the Quality Rating System had value far out of proportion to its price. It would give parents some assurance that they are getting the best for their children and for the millions of dollars they spend on child care each year, and it was a key selling point for an influential group of supporters in the corporate community.
The governor's veto statement said the rating system was inadequate because it focused on inputs, not outputs. That's nonsense.
First, the proposed system did include output measures -- assessments of children's progress in language and social skills, for example.
Second, volumes of academic research show that in child care, better inputs produce better outputs, when they are serious inputs such as trained teachers and adequate teacher-child ratios.
Finally, some 20 other states have adopted similar measures -- states that are rapidly overtaking Minnesota in this crucial field.
The governor has asked two of his commissioners to work on a better set of quality measures, and it's possible that they'll produce one. But that's no reason to veto a good system while waiting for something better, or to leave Minnesota flying blind until they do.
