BANGOR, Maine — Head Start and child care providers across Maine can accommodate fewer students and have less staff compared with a year ago because of budget cuts the Legislature enacted earlier this year.
The cuts were part of a budget adjustment bill that sought to close an $80 million gap this spring. The effects have trickled down to children and families in the ensuing months.
“There have probably been cuts throughout the entire state,” said Doug Orville, chairman of the Maine Head Start Directors Association. “And we’ve been told that state funding for these programs would basically be on the chopping block in future years.”
Though Head Start funding from state and federal sources has been dwindling for years, it decreased sharply in Gov. Paul LePage’s supplemental budget bill. The bill passed on largely party-line votes by legislative Republicans who argued the cuts represented structural changes in state government that would bring Maine in line with programs in other states.
“We simply can’t be everything for everyone any longer,” LePage spokeswoman Adrienne Bennett told the Bangor Daily News at the time. “These structural changes will bring long-term savings.”
But some argue that the cuts force families who can’t afford child care to decide between working or studying or ensuring their children are properly supervised. Without Head Start or child care subsidies, the only other option for many families is full-priced child care.
State funding for Head Start, which last year stood at about $3.75 million, was reduced by $2 million. Head Start has existed in Maine since 1965 and has received state government funding since 1983. The budget bill also reduced child-care subsidies by $1.9 million in the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program, which is funded from the Fund for a Healthy Maine. At the time, child-care advocates said that particular cut would affect approximately 1,700 Maine families — all of whom have parents who either were working or continuing their educations.
Though Orville and others were unable to quantify exactly how many children have been affected by the state cuts because Head Start programs are administered on a regional basis, every Head Start organization contacted by the Bangor Daily News described closed classrooms, fewer slots for children from low-income families and lost jobs.
Jean Bridges, child development director for Penquis, which oversees head starts in Penobscot, Knox and Piscataquis counties, said essentially flat funding from the federal government since 2004 caused a long-term process of seeking savings while trying to hold onto as many Head Start slots as possible, which is why the state budget cuts enacted this year have hit programs and classrooms directly.
Over the summer, Penquis eliminated 27 preschool slots — which are often a partnership between Head Start and local school districts — and another six in straight Head Start programs. Through the process, three classrooms were closed in Rockland and North Haven. Penquis eliminated three management positions and more than a dozen child care workers, said Bridges. She said her organization’s Head Start enrollments have gone from a high of 616 in 2006 to 451 now.
Sue Kingsland, director of child and family services for the Midcoast Maine Community Action Program in Bath, said her organization closed a Head Start center in the northern Lincoln County town of North Whitefield.
“We just couldn’t support that center,” she said. “It was a difficult decision but it closed for the last time in May of this year. It was a result of [the state budget cuts].”
Orville, who in addition to his role with the Maine Head Start Directors Association is executive director of the Ellsworth-based Child and Family Opportunities, which administers Head Start in Hancock and Washington counties, said classrooms have been closed in Bucksport and Ellsworth as a direct result of the budget cuts. Orville, like Bridges, said his organization has found new efficiencies in recent years that until now avoided major cuts to services. He said 31 state-funded Head Start slots were lost in the cuts.
“We’ve done all the trimming and consolidating that we could do,” he said, adding that positions for two teachers and three assistant teachers were cut. “We have to have a critical mass of children in our classrooms. That was part of the calculation that we went through.”
Judy Reidt-Parker, an early childhood policy analyst for the Maine Children’s Alliance, said she’s heard recently of Head Start programs also being curtailed in Kennebec and Somerset counties, among others. She said that although the situation is dire for many Maine families, the impact for some was blunted because the Department of Health and Human Services was able to avoid taking away some child-care subsidies, though there is a waiting list for the subsidies after years of no waiting. DHHS officials did not return calls Tuesday from the Bangor Daily News.
Reidt-Parker said the cuts will be felt in the Maine economy sooner or later in the form of fewer higher-education graduates and a diminished workforce. Approximately 70 percent of families with children enrolled in Head Start are working, and 100 percent of families receiving child-care subsidies are working or in an educational program.
“I think that we forget that this is really an economic tool, not just for families, but also for the larger community,” she said.
Bridges agreed.
“It’s going to create a real bind for families who have to make tough decisions about do I work or do I have to give up my semester at school,” she said. “That’s a really sad situation.”
Conservatives’ interest in the well being of children ends at their birth.
“The ( NEGATIVE ) effects ( OF THE CONSERVATIVE NO TAX FOR THE WEALTHY, NO COMPROMISE, POLICIES ) have trickled down to children and families in the ensuing months.”
And those negative effects are all that ever does trickle down upon working people.
As to reducing welfare this is a step backwards.
Baby sit your own 4 year old, the state can’t afford it anymore!
The problem with that , you see, is that if we don’t help with childcare- they don’t work at all- and we pay more. This program is definitely one we should fund.
Things like early childhood education and public transportation are properly viewed as investments rather than expenditures. Investing in early childhood education saves money in the long run on jails and welfare programs, just as investing in public transpo saves money on much more expensive road and traffic expansion projects.
This isn’t socialism, it’s common sense.
logically but in practice not always the case. The idea of pre-k education is great but headstart has proved ineffective to improve children’s aptitude or performance in primary education.
How? Minimum wage jobs do not pay for childcare.
headstart is not childcare. And if you make minimum wage and receive food stamps there are existing programs specifically for childcare.
.no mas.
Private daycare and private preschool is NEVER a better alternative to a good loving home. That is always the preferred situation. As far as I know, there is nothing to prevent a good loving “poor” family from reading to their children.
Not all parents can be stay at home mothers or fathers.
You want these low income parents to work? To be out there making a living? They need help.
I dunno if caterwaul agrees but I am all for helping them. There are PLENTY of subsidized options for child care out there. the ASPIRE program which I keep mentioning is a good example of one that is hand in hand with TANF. Head start is for the hundredth time not meant as a daycare. It is meant as a pre k educational institution therefore it carries increased costs. Which is all well and good and I of course support pre-k but headstart hasn’t shown and improved learning among primary students to my knowledge. All that aside like I said if childcare is the concern lets opt for more cost efficient programs and subsidies.
I worked two jobs and still found time to read to my kids every single day. Not saying it was easy. Didn’t do anything outside of work or family.
just because “it works” is a crappy logic to keep a failing program. It was never meant as a daycare program. A public funded daycare program could be far more cost effective. I have no problem with head start as a pre-k educational program but the issue here is; it is being argued that it results in a loss of daycare not a loss of pre-k education.
Really, get a grip, Mitt. Why do you believe that conservatives have to pay for other people’s children?? The role of government shouldn’t be to tax us so we can pay for the lack of planning for others, but to make sure that citizens have the right to take advantage of all the rights, and responsibilities of citizenship.
I have no doubt that eliminating the public use of funds to create, and raise families will cause hardships for certain parents. They may have to delay certain choices, or get second jobs, or learn to live in marriages that may not be the happiest, in order to provide financially for their own children. That’s life. Sorry.
Without the state-funded safety net relied on by imitation adults (my term for people who have children, apartments, cars, flat screen tvs, stereos, x-boxes, cell phones, and everything else middle class Americans have BUT have never held a JOB) most will find they probably have to stop smoking, stop getting piercings and tatoos, and actually live at home for a while to make ends meet.
MEANWHILE;
Relative to corporate welfare and their own MILITARY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX
job security….
Northern Maine base could deter missiles, National Academy says
… “the National Academy that includes scientists, engineers and high-level military experts, … identified Fort Drum , Rome, N.Y., or the Aroostook County town of Caribou as ideal sites for facilities designed to intercept long-range missiles from hostile countries such as North Korea or Iran ……. (which do not even have long-range missiles or reliable weapons to put on them) ……. as they approach targets in the United States.”http://bangor-launch.newspackstaging.com/2012/09/11/news/aroostook/northern-maine-base-could-deter-missiles-national-academy-says/#comment-647241474
Absolutely agree the the MIC is an issue and I challenge the assumptions behind those funding programs as well. But it doesn’t excuse social programs that encourage recipients to have the victim-complex and to sit back and take taxpayers for a ride.
There will always be some people at the bottom of the economic ladder. Republican policies make sure their numbers will be huge. By your arguments, poor people should be taught early–you must never have children. Meanwhile, restrictions on birth control and abortion being pushed by Republican leaders are aimed at ensuring that the poor will indeed have children.
Republican policies will make sure no help is available for parents or children, for example ensuring that the parents will be unable to work due to lack of affordable childcare. Then conservatives can sit back and despise the parents for being lazy layabout cell-phone owners–because you’ve made sure they can’t work–and you can advocate for their kids not getting school breakfasts or lunches (so they won’t have the energy to study).
Yup, same old Liz Davies. Poor parents who are trapped because they can’t find affordable childcare. Funny, when we were raising our kids, Liz, we couldn’t afford childcare either. So we worked around each other’s schedules, worked multiple jobs, found friends in similar situations and shared childcare obligations with each other. NEVER took part in a government program. FOUND a way on our own to survive the years when childcare was needed without expecting the TAXPAYER to pay for MY DECISION to have children.
Oh, btw, did I tell you at the time I was a DEMOCRAT?
Your philosophy seems to be–You didn’t get help, so no one should get help. You suffered, so everyone should suffer. It’s every Mom for herself, and the devil take the hindmost.
Nope. My comment is: sometimes you have to make sacrifices for your children. If you aren’t ready, willing, or able to do that, then MAYBE YOU SHOULDN’T HAVE CHILDREN.
no mas
Ok, if they “truly can’t afford” a child, here are their options:
1. Ask family for help, financially, live with them, take a second job, etc.
2. Adoption
3. Abortion
Apparently you feel you have the answers to all the problems of the world.
Nice delusion you have going.
OK, so what is your solution? That we are obliged, as a society, to see the child is born, left with people who admittedly can’t afford it, pay to raise it and educate it? If that isn’t patently delusional, I don’t know what is. I think I have provided three highly adequate solutions. What is yours?
ug
he isn’t saying it does. However we aren’t talking about a few unplanned pregnancies here. And I know people who have accidental pregnancies and they immediately start reshaping their financial future and cut a lot out of their lives. However by in large we have many young people getting pregnant before they are emotionally and mentally stable for a child. Finances are only 1 piece of the child rearing puzzle.
If you have an unplanned pregnancy which is ridiculous in the first place because birth control options are available at little or no cost to young men and women… tomcaterwaul has given several reasonable options. option 1 ask for family help odds are if you’re poor your family is poor however they might be able to contribute to childcare or parenting lessons… enough to help you get on your feet with a kid and make a little extra time to pick up a job or two. #2 adoption though hard it is a viable option to have a healthy pregnancy as adoptive parents will pay for medical care. You can have an open adoption so in the future you can be involved in the child’s life if you wish. option 3 is a deeply personal one I don’t like but if a child is facing living in an abusive neglectful home maybe it is better to not bring them into the world… I dunno.
Exactly, Tom. Statistics show that unwed mothers account for 40% of all births in America. As I mentioned earlier, we use that awful term, “single mother” to describe these parents. If these mothers are unable to pay for these babies, WHO WILL PAY?
You still haven’t answered my question. What is your solution to a situation where parents insist they are unable to afford another child?
Then don’t have any more. I never said to have children willy nilly or to continue after one child. I said the best laid plans do go to heck much of the time.
but they keep having the little bastards haha! I know several people right now who had their first child and immediately went on the system actually… before they even had the kid they had signed up for TANF, WIC, SNAP, and housing vouchers. So while they were pregnant they sat on the couch in their apartment and watched TV all day and did nothing. Within a year of the first kid pregnant again with a kid from a different guy. These kids are getting dumped right into the system.
How do we break this cycle of ignorance?
Make it work and get on with life.
Great answer!!! It seems the posters here all think that government should have a program to address every single “what if” situation. Good grief.
…….ygh..
So what is your solution?
It’s like George Carlin said, Repubs really don’t give a crap about kids until they are old enough to go to war. I think they are in for a big surprise when they find that government in this country exists for EVERYONE. Not just the ones who can afford it.
What does it mean to “give a crap” about children? Does it mean that taxpayers are obligated to fund their upbringing? Sure, this country “exists for everyone.” But what does that mean? If this country stands for something, it is that no one says to anyone, “you can’t live hear, work here, go to school here” simply because of their race, creed, color, gender, orientation. This country does NOT stand for the obligation of TAX PAYERS to level the economic disparities between individuals that will ALWAYS exist that lead to some people being able to afford nicer homes, better schools, and get better jobs. This country exists to enable anyone with enough stamina and work ethic to have the opportunity to grab the golden ring.
As long as I am alive, I will fight to eliminate the social safety net because in my daily experiences, I find the social programs foster a mindset that the recipient is a victim and is therefore relived of all obligations to try to better their own situation on their own FIRST before seeking a government handout.
By your thinking, a child born to a poor family or a single mother doesn’t deserve the same start in life as a child born to a wealthy family. How does that fit into your equal rights policy? Why would you want to kick a poor kid while they were already starting on the bottom? It’s like I just said..Repubs don’t give a rat’s butt about kids. We need that money spent on Head Start for corporate welfare. Why not use that @300,000 earmarked for studying that useless Canadian highway for Head Start?
No, you insist on twisting my words. What I recognize is that a child from a “poor family” might not have the same choices as a child from a wealthy family. My point is that the purpose of the form of government we have in America is to MINIMIZE the effect of being born wealthy has over those born “poor” by making sure the opportunity exists to succeed not based on your last name but on your last effort.
Last I knew, reading to your child each day is the number one thing you can do to increase your child’s chances of success in school. There is absolutely nothing I know of that prohibits the poorest family in the world from making sure that reading is part of every day’s activity.
So you are saying that poor inner city public schools are just as good as public schools in affluent neighborhoods? That teenagers from affluent neighborhoods who run afoul of the law for drugs or behavior are punished the same as those kids from the poor neighborhoods? In your rants you seem to forget the facts of the war on the poor. It is the governments job to make sure everyone has equal opportunity. That is why we have laws that say you can not discriminate based on race, color, creed, or sexual orientation. It is why affirmative action was passed, because it was proven that white men were getting jobs over women, and people of color simply based on the fact they are white males. Once the Government decided to regulate education it became their job to make sure everyone regardless of economic background had the same opportunities. They have failed of course, numbers don’t lie, but the fact remains it is their job.
I’m not saying that inner city public schools are just as good as schools in affluent neighborhoods. What I am saying is that choices involve where you choose to live, how you choose to spend your money, what you save for, what you eat, what you wear, and if you are a parent, sometimes the choices you make have consequences for your kids. Fair or not, rich kids have, on the surface, more options than poor kids. If you are going to make the blanket statement that because you believe that inner city public schools are worse than suburban schools, then what is your solution? My argument is that as long as we provide social services and the so-called safety net, poor people stay in poor neighborhoods. Without it, I believe you will see a growth in the middle class. With safety nets, you will see the DEATH of the middle class. We can’t afford the social programs anymore.
Fixing the problems in other areas will fix the social programs, that was my point. Look at drugs for example. There are a few Drug Courts out there now, and instead of sending young inner city use offenders to prison send them to rehab. The Drug Courts already do this, but mostly it is for white middle and upper class kids. Research varies, but for every dollar you spend on a drug court/rehab program you save $7-$11 in the Criminal Court/Prison system. Since the War on Drugs and prisons cost this country billions every year, Drug courts could save enough money in a year to pay five years worth of social programs. I’m not advocating making everyone middle class at minimum, I’m just saying that everyone should get a fair shake at a decent education for Pre-K through a college degree so they can make themselves middle class. Some will fail of course, I just do not want it to be because they didn’t get the chance. I would hate to think that the next DaVinci, Einstein, or Edison was out there, and because of the economic status of their parents, they won’t get to live up to that potential.
No. My comment recognizes a simple fact. Wealthier kids have more opportunities than kids that aren’t so wealthy. Sorry. That’s a fact of life, and NOTHING this government should try to equalize by taking money from every taxpayer’s pocket.
Are you absolutely certain that you yourself, or someone you love, will never–
1) have a severe accident or medical illness & become disabled
2) give birth to a baby with a disabling medical or genetic disorder
3) have a child or grandchild who has a severe accident or medical illness & becomes disabled
4) lose a job, be unable to find another, and become impoverished
5) grow old and impoverished
I have news for you if you do believe none of these things could happen to you or your family: Bad things DO happen to good people. If you destroy the social safety net, it will not exist when you and/or your loved ones need it. You will discover that you have cut off your own nose to spite other people’s faces.
First of all, everyone grows old. So everybody SHOULD plan for their retirement. Very few do. Why should I be responsible, as a taxpayer, for someone who made a decent wage throughout their life, but instead of saving anything for retirement, chose instead to “live for the moment” and didn’t save a penny?
I will never be unable to find another job or start my own business.
If I have a severe accident or medical illness I have insurance for that.
What do you mean by disabled? The majority of people I know are only “disabled” when it comes to working. The vast majority of people I know getting SSDI are always at the waterfront concerts, out for dinner, drinking at local establishments, at the mall, in effect, doing everything a non-disabled person does except WORK.
I have taken care of my children and grandchildren through will and life insurance policies.
I know all about your allegedly genetically disabled child. Who has held a job in the past. Why can’t she live at home with you and save the taxpayer money?
.0098
No, what I am questioning is the definition of “disabled” wherein a person is able to participate in all aspects of life EXCEPT WORK.
…..ugh……
You again dodge the issue at hand–if a person who gets a disability check engages in every single activity that working people do, with the exception of holding down a job, why do we consider them disabled? THAT is my point which you are ducking.
…..
So answer the question–if a person who gets SSDI is able to perform every single activity that a non-disabled person engages in–except holding a job–how are they disabled??
ugh
You won’t feel that way if you find yourself in need of that safety net.
The safety nets that barely exist now could help you in a time of need. You can say you have planned well but life happens and things go wrong. You are not above that happening no matter how well laid your plans may be.
Social programs exist because we need them to help the less fortunate among us young and old.
Children that are less advantaged that attend these programs and are part of your child’s or your grandchild’s generation will benefit.
Any social safety net that is SO BROAD that it will address 100% of the population (we all grow old) but only is funded by less than 50% of the population is doomed to failure.
bingo. careful you might hurt someone with your crazy mathematics…
they keep telling us that social security is sound and not a ponzi scheme. Right now a retired person has 10 people in the work force supporting them in 4-5 years it will be 6 people per retiree. just wait until it is 2 or 3 people per retiree/disabled person.
Ah, yes. The Landslide LePage jobs program. Cut as many as you can.
Yes, that’s the right idea! Keep cutting the childcare funding for the generations to come. Keep cutting the budgets for the education and well-being of those who have absolutely no say in things…. But keep bringing in and supporting those methadone clinics! Don’t want anybody going through withdrawls now. Seriously, this makes me sick.
Babysit your own 4 year olds, the state can’t afford it!
Alright, take away my child care…but give me back my food stamps and TANF so I can stay at home to “babysit” and support my child. I think we all want what’s best for our children, for the future of this country, and that is definitely not offered from the clinic where you get your next fix.
glad I work hard and abstain from starting my family so you can irresponsibly have children your not ready to support. If you can’t afford to feed your children don’t have them in the first place. Don’t blame rest of the world on all your ill decision making. If you have a kid and make minimum wage your applicable for tanf and food stamps so that argument is nil. Also the ASPIRE program is in place so you can work or go to school it is a dedicated child care voucher program not a pre-k program.
The argument of methadone clinics over GA programs is also a stretch. I am sure with an anagram of Nancy Botwin you partake in 420 activities maybe you should lay off the dope and spend more time building your resume to find a better and/or more fulfilling job.
Wait a minute!! Is Botwin REALLY SAYING that we are citizens should be OBLIGATED to provide her with foodstamps and TANF so that she can stay home and raise her children? Really???
Hurrah! Someone finally had the guts to come out and say what they are really looking for. Oh my god. What a country. Have a kid and believe that society owes you something.
But we can afford $300000 for a useless highway and several lawsuits to promote LePage’s political policies? How about affordinf to send LePage on a business trip to our friends, the Communist Chinese? Throwing Mainers to the dogs to further his own political goals is not O.K. with me!
You are right on!
How right you are. The money will go where it benefits the people who want it cut. My childen are all grown, but I care about all children. Maybe some of them just need a good meal and some individual attention.
The same story if Paul Ryan becomes VP. Reduce as much as possible the already modest safety net that puts America to shame vis-a-vis Canada and Western Europe if not elsewhere too. But this is the utopia of the GOP in Maine and elsewhere. And blame the victims for their plight in the process.
How about not having kids until you can afford them?
A Pro- Choice conservative ?
Isn’t that about as rare as a real voter fraud case with a conviction ?
socially liberal conservative = libertarian.
However, one does not have to be pro-choice when waiting to have children. Abstinence and safe sex is far better birth control then abortion. Condoms and birth control are also far more cost effective then abortion. You can get a 5 year supply of birth control and condoms (with average intercourse rate of 5 times per week) for the cost of 1 medical abortion. I am not pro-life/choice I am pro-smart.
Take your choice! $9 million annually for maine children .. or the same to recruit out of state jocks (1/2 of the student body and $10,000 per student per year) for the sports and spa Maine Maritime Academy. LePage up’ed the MMA subsidy and left Maine’s seniors and youth to defend for themselves. It’s time to privatize the MMA.
for sure.
That, of course, makes sense. Once upon a time, I was a Radiologic Technologist with one kid and one on the way. I was making great money at the time. A one second injury ended that career before my second was born. What does someone like me do, after all our savings are gone, and we can’t work?
Fortunately, I fell into a second career just in the nick of time, but child care for two kids, in an evening program which I looked into, cost eighty dollars a week more than I took home. I found a private home situation which only cost about 25% of my paycheck so I made do with that. I was lucky to get promoted thru the ranks rather quickly and eventually the child care bill barely hurt. On my slightly more than minimum wage job, I did not qualify for any help.
I had a hard time finding a job when my husband and I re located for his job. We had no family around and when I did find a job that started me at 9$ I had a hard time finding a sitter that would accept less than 9$ to watch my son….not only did we not qualify for assistance because my husband had a full time job, no day care center will watch your child past 5pm and that didn’t fit the hours of my job…..
Its been almost 2 years….I make 12.50$ now….if you WANT to work hard to get what you need you can manage….
Koudos to you for being a good roll model to your children!
Or changing your priorities once you do have kids..
Yeah, working and getting an education are pretty twisted priorities…
If the taxpayers have to pay for your childcare….
The lack of personal responsibility is the culprit. I did not have children until I was way into my 30’s so I could give them the best .
And of course now nothing could possibly go wrong for you………
I abree with that, but what about the ones who could afford them until their jobs were given to the Asians? Also, why punish the kids for their parents problems? I thought the whole reason for Head Start was to give underpriviledged kids a boost so they could learn on a par with their classmates. Why beat them down before they even get started? LePug of all people should realize that.
yes that was the point of it however after 50 years of head start there has been no statisical increase in those children’s test scores.
Where are the unbiased stats that prove that? Not stats from the right or left.
Actually headstart does indeed help children. It’s all in who you choose to listen to, but ask someone who had a child in the program and most will tell you it was a good program and has much success.
http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/search/detailmini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=ED252565&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&accno=ED252565
here is 1 study I found with a 10 second google. I can find more if you’re really interested but I don’t have access through the university like I used to published research studies on the topic. Trust me though they exist and I mean at this point isn’t it fairly common knowledge our young people are fairly ignorant in general? look at the reality shows that poll people on the street about where Azerbaijan is and the blank stares they get back…
The funny thing about this study is it is from 1965 to present (whenever study was published) 1965 is the year head start was started.
Furthermore any junkhead who gets free methadone will tell you methadone maintenance programs are awesome and great success. Of course a program that gives you something for free is going to be hailed as awesome by those getting it for free.
My base point is head start is not meant to be child care. A fact that this is one of the biggest arguments to keep it is just a testament to its failure and misuse. It is meant as a precursor to a formalized public education (which is also crappy right now). Am I blaming all the ill’s of education on head start? absolutely not it is a very small part of the educational process. But if childcare is the issue here lets end head start and start “voucherizing” childcare i.e. a revamped ASPIRE program.
There wouldn’t be many children born to any of us working or otherwise if we waited for the perfect time to start a family or in many cases accidents do happen.
What a perfect world so many people think we can have by pre planning. The best laid plans often go awry.
I’ve got to weigh in here. Head Start is a wonderful program when used correctly. I was fortunate enough for my son to be able to attend. I am a college educated woman who had life well on track. When my now ex-husband and I planned for our first child we were in good shape financially and I was fortunate enough to be able to stay home with our child after birth. Two years later he upped and decided the Dad gig wasn’t working for him…he and his mistress up and left the state; only after draining every cent that wasn’t solely in my name. I was financially ruined, had no health insurance for my child or I, and had not worked in 2 years. I was fortunate to find employment immediately, but not in my field. The pay was better than minimum wage, so I really couldn’t complain…it was a job. However, having never had to worry about child care before I was shocked at the cost when I researched different day care facilities! Even after moving into a very small and modest apt., getting rid of the car I had and buying a car that would leave me with no payment…I was living a no frills lifestyle and there was no way I could afford child care also. I was pointed in the direction of Head Start by a friend. It was a life saver! Not only for my child but for me as well. I volunteered every instance I could, attended every workshop regarding single parenting that was made available. And, every 6 months my income was reevaluated and my weekly child care costs were adjusted as such. I was fortunate enough to gain enough work experience that lead me to a job within my field. I am proud to say that summer before my child was about to enter Kindergarten, I was voucher and subsidy free. I paid for my child to remain in the daycare portion of the program out of my own pocket. Head Start, like all social programs, are very valuable when used correctly. I am so saddened that other hard working parents who find themselves in a situation similar to mine will not be able to take part.
You made the decision to marry your spouse, now ex-spouse. If you got a lousy divorce settlement that didn’t hold your ex-husband accountable for child support sufficient to help cover the cost of child care, that is YOUR problem, NOT the taxpayers’.
My point Mr. Caterwaul is that social programs can be useful when not overused and abused. I worked and was taxed like every other person bringing home a paycheck. I have risen about my temporary setback, own a home now, pay my property taxes, and save for my child’s future education all while working on earning my masters degree (which my employer and I are paying for…no loans, grants, subsidy’s, etc.) I don’t want to fund someone’s lifestyle with my tax dollars either, but I do not mind helping someone out that truly wants to better their life. I don’t feel I was “owed” this…it was difficult for me to ask for help, and I am thankful for the opportunity. I didn’t collect food stamps, Mainecare, or any other program, even though our state government did deem me eligible. You’d be amazed at what they push on you and encourage you to use.
So thanks for your help Mr. Caterwaul, it’s appreciated. I hope my tax dollars can benefit you in some way down the road…I won’t be bitter over it, I’ll be happy; I’d like to think of it as repaying your favor.
And PS, I got a wonderful divorce settlement… unfortunately it’s the enforcement of it that’s difficult. Every time he’s caught up to, he moves, changes jobs…any of the other various tactics deadbeats use. I’ve given up, and am fine on my own. I wouldn’t want to use any more of your tax dollars trying to pursue this through our legal system.
I applaud your efforts, but wonder why it’s my tax dollars being used to track down your deadbeat ex. I ask you to give as much time into answering that question as you spent on your previous posts. The fact that you have given your ex a free pass on his parental responsibilities is a personal choice that should not translate into a taxpayer expense because his lack of support places you in a category we call poverty.
Also, your post exactly highlights what I object to and what I believe our current system encourages: that people quit taking responsibility to find solutions to their current financial woes and turn to government programs. You mentioned yourself: “You’d be amazed at what they push on you and encourage you to use.” No, I wouldn’t be amazed. I see it all the time. The creation of victims and the belief that the taxpayer is a limitless gravy train for social programs.
How about a frank answer: in your time of financial difficulties–why pay rent, why didn’t you move back home or in with family?
I have only one surviving family member, a grandparent who lives out west. She is on an incredibly fixed income herself in an elderly housing complex that my grandfathers assets as well as their retirement barely pay for. My ex-in-laws were actually incredibly supportive, they purchased my son clothing, gave large gift cards to Wal-Mart, and supermarkets for Christmas, and Birthdays. They did what they could, and I am forever grateful. Other than that…I have no family.
It is not that I have given my ex a free pass. What do I do; continue to spend thousands upon thousands of dollars (which have been out of my pocket) on lawyers to have the same end result? He’s in contempt, there are warrants out for his arrest if he returns to the state, his license has been revoked…at what point do I focus on my finances, and start putting that money to use where I will get a better return; such as my own retirement or my son’s education? This a debt that will never go away for my ex. My son could be 40 years old and his father’s estate, if he has anything when he passes, would have to pay out this back child support…or at least that’s how it’s been explained to me.
And I think your missing an important point…my child care was not a free ride. Was it the normal $140 dollars per week? No. I paid just over half. What I am saying is that without this temporary support my success now would not have been possible. I am fortunate and I also think I am in the minority that use social programs as they were designed to be used. I have no problem giving a hand up to someone that needs it.
So you didn’t get a wonderful divorce settlement and you are opting to give him a free pass. All the money you spend trying to get him to live up to his agreement is completely reimbursable. Like I said, it’s not easy chasing a deadbeat dad, but I believe it is your contractual obligation to do so. Otherwise, the taxpayers pay for your choice.
Criminally irresponsible. Maine open for business? Hah! While LePage lines his and his cronies’ pockets, kids go hungry and parents can no longer work or educate themselves. That’s cutting 100 years of progress in 4 short years. I hope he’s proud of his short legacy.
That’s actually the State not paying for babbysitting for a year! Criminally irresponsible, get a clue!
I sincerely hope his legacy is short.
BancyNotwin___It’s precisely because the past administration brought in all the Meth clinics and a host of other programs that we CAN’T afford valuable programs like Head Start! The legislature cut reimbursement to those too but the D’s squealed about that as well.
Head Start costs about 10,000.00 per year per child….there would be more opportunities to help folks with day care assistance if they put that money toward the other child care subsidies that cost about 3,300.00 per child per year….
“funding from state and federal sources has been dwindling for years” Most states rely on only federal funding for Head Start. A few years ago the liberals (generous with your tax dollars) decided the state should provide more funding. Money we don’t have if we want to fund all the other programs they are so generous with.
“Though Orville and others were unable to quantify exactly how many children have been affected by the state cuts because Head Start programs are administered on a regional basis, every Head Start organization contacted by the Bangor Daily News described closed classrooms, fewer slots for children from low-income families and lost jobs.”
Now that’s a scary statement. They can tell you how much money they spend, but they can’t tell you how many children actually use the program??? Can you say PORK BARREL??
Teacher asked little Johnny if he could spell “Pork Barrel”. “Yep” he said.”D-E-M-O-C-R-A-T”
“The term pork barrel politics usually refers to spending which is intended to benefit constituents of a politician in return for their political support, either in the form of campaign contributions or votes.” Wikipedia. Sound like any governors you know?
The middle class has already had to make this sacrifice, child care, or stay at home. They did not get subsidies. After two children it is cheaper to stay home.
Let them see how hard it is to get a job in this economy even with a college degree after a couple years at home with the kids.
These are also people who had to use family and friends because they could not afford full-time daycare so they could work, yet never qualified for childcare connections.
How are they supposed to pay for and subsidize welfare recipients daycare and pre school?
Agreed….it is unfortunate to cut programs for children….but there are plenty of families that are bearly getting by who dont qualify for assistance whos kids are already in the same boat
I agree that there are plenty of families who need assistance but don’t qualify under current rules. The solution is NOT to take help away from those who do currently qualify. The solution is to extend assistance to all who need it. It’s part of having a socially responsible government. In my mind, giving families a hand up is far more important than giving millionaires a handout.
Oh, GREAT ANSWER. It’s just like special education!! Everybody needs help! Everybody has a special need that needs “accommodations!” Expand the group who need assistance! Don’t do a thing to help yourself! Look to the government first! Why try to get help from yourself or your family?? What an incredibly revealing answer.
Apparently you have never had a learning disabled child, or known one well.
Traumatic brain injuries cure themselves so easily! Cerebral palsy wouldn’t cause a moment’s distress to a Republican child. An IQ of 60 wouldn’t be considered a problem–just par for the course among conservatives. Dyslexia doesn’t happen. Visually impaired kids, deaf kids, no problem. Slap ’em across the face and they’ll see and hear just fine, no accommodations required!
“Child, heal thyself!” “Parents, you’re capable of doing brain surgery, if you’d just bother to try!” The Republican mantra.
How incredibly condescending you are!! WHat? You think deaf people, visually impaired people, blind people can’t work?
Find a label, paste it on, and find a government program to give’em assistance. That’s why we have ADD, dyslexia, and other phony “disabilities.” I know because I AM diagnosed with dsylexia but I never let it slow me down. My weakness in one area made me stronger in another. But your poor child, if (sh)he was diagnosed with it, would probably have to be in a dyslexia support group. To cope.
Get on with life. We aren’t ever all dealt the same hand. You gotta make the most of it or forever be stuck in your poor lonely pity-party.
The topic was special education. To quote the comment I was responding to–“It’s just like special education!! Everybody needs help! Everybody has a special need that needs “accommodations!”
Apparently you never received help for dyslexia in school? You write well, so you clearly made progress somehow. But I would never argue that no child or teenager who has dyslexia should receive help in school, just because some manage to deal with it on their own.
Nor would I argue that kids or adults with a serious visual impairment should just struggle along without glasses, or without any necessary visual aid. Or that hearing-impaired people should just grin and pretend they can hear (though that’s what happens when they have MaineCare, since it doesn’t pay for hearing aids). Or that a person who’s had a traumatic brain injury should miraculously thrive without rehabilitation.
With appropriate accommodations, of course people with a variety of disabilities can work. Without them, many cannot.
Please explain to me why it’s the state’s responsibility to pay for someone’s childcare?
~eyeroll~
Because we all live here in this state and it makes us all in this together.
Keep your hand out of my pocket. If I want to be charitable, I’ll do it my own way.
like hell it does. If I chose to be irresponsible and play with fire and burn down a building which costs 100k. The landlord sues me do I then go collect 100 from each of my neighbors to pay for my bad decision making? I know that is a strawman argument to an extent but it can be applied to any individual decision and expecting the collective to pay for it.
lepage will be a one term governor. obama has a good 15 point lead on willard in the last maine poll. Kind of surprising with all the old cranky tax grumblers in maine this is a very progressive state that made a voting mistake in a 5 way race. im guessing the next democrat governor will bring back many funds to the poor and needy children and end the estate tax to wealthy summer people to help pay for it. you know something called common since
He knows he’s 1 term. That’s why he is in China making more connections for Mardens on our dime.
The usual conservative penny-wise and pound-foolish legislation, wreaking predictable havoc on workers and damaging Maine’s economy.
Maine, The way life should be for the ones who can afford it!
like paul ryan, i’m a disciple of ayn rand. i too believe, “i’ve got mine, the hell with everyone else.”
If Republicans are not going to support the children of low income mothers (and Head Start is a great investment in the future) then Republicans should certainly not prevent the mother from having an abortion. Oh, right, Republicans are America’s Taliban.
well maybe low income mothers should keep their legs cross? Or utilize all the family planning resources covered by medicare/mainecare?
headstart is not a great investment in the future. It has been in place for over 50 years have we seen any substantial improvement of the education of poor young people? Not really.
Maybe men should keep it put away ? For every woman raising children alone there is a deadbeat dad. I can not count the amount of men I have met who whine about an “ex” on welfare at the same time they are 30 grand behind in child support for multiple children.
Stop blaming woman for being single mothers and start blaming fathers for being deadbeat losers – oh right then you would have to ask Lepage why he left his first couple kids to be raised by a single mother.
ok fine. men should also keep it in their pants. I am not blaming single woman solely sorry I wasn’t trying to sound chauvinistic. I know plenty of those dead beat dads who don’t pay their child support. In the end it was a decision (a poor one) between two people, perhaps influenced by alcohol or drugs… but in the end unless we are talking rape… The women and man both are to “blame” for bringing a child into this world with 0 forethought into how they would support it.
I have seen women try to trap men via pregnancy and I have seen men push a women to have a baby to fix their relationship or create some kind of flawed idea of a permanent bond. However the vast majority of the time is people are just foolish and irresponsible with their genetic material.
seriously is their anything people won’t tie lepage too? There is nothing wrong with being a single mother. Do you know the circumstance of his first marriage and subsequent divorce? I don’t, all I could find was those two children (now adults) live in canada and they were divorced in 1980.
I really hate the term, “single mom.” It implies she is on her own, poor thing, raising a child all by herself. Unless she is widowed (and in which case, if the kids are under 18, the government provides a substantial payment to her on behalf of her kids), single moms MADE the choice to be either unmarried or divorced or separated. Either way a “single mom” has options to pursue child support. The fact that she decided to have a child with a poor risk of a father when it comes to providing support, ie., has a criminal record, drug problem, or is lazy–is REALLY NOT THE TAXPAYER’S PROBLEM. I really encourage everyone to examine the language of this discussion and ban the term “single mom.”
yes broad sweeping terms indoctrinate people into that victim complex you spoke about. I think bottom line the irresponsibility of all these people have children on the states dole is immoral and crazy.
The shortsightedness of those who can’t see the value of a relatively cheap program like Head Start is mind-boggling.
Are you going to sit down in front of a group of 4-year olds and tell them they’re on their own?
when it comes to government programs there is no such thing as cheap
head start was never intended as a daycare. It is supposed to jumpstart the education process for more impoverished children in our society. It has failed miserably in that respect and to keep pumping money in under the premise of an educational institution when it is being used as a daycare is ridiculous.
The government already offers programs like ASPIRE child care, and even though I am never an ideological fan of social welfare it is FAR more cost effective then headstart. That would be like Having a restaurant be how we adminster food assistance. I am all for pre-k education but headstart hasnt fulfilled its fiduciary to the tax payer to return positive results in the investment we have made as evident of the falling test scores and collective intelligence of youth.
There are other aspects as important as test scores.
such as? a place to keep the rugrats while people are out getting high or spending their SSI/SSD @ the casino? School is not a babysitter that is a very small ancillary consequence of school k-12. Because children are physically located their throughout the day parents are free to do other things. However the primary function of any school program is to provide education or in this day and age indoctrination into a failing social/political/economic machine. But people viewing headstart as a dedicated childcare service costing as much as 12k per child per year is crazy.
You said “head start was never intended as a daycare.” and that’s exactly what came to mind when I saw the headline to this story on the BDN home page.
The maximum deduction of child care expense from earnings needs to be high enough and it needs to be the same for TANF, food stamps and medicaid benefit calculations. There’s no waiting list and all recipients who can work are eligible. They just need to find a babysitter and get receipts.
A big problem with that is there are a lot of babysitters who are only looking for under the table income. Some getting TANF. Some are getting unemployment, worker’s comp, SSI, VA compensation or SSDI. Some of them get nothing like that but they don’t want to pay any taxes on the babysitting income.
this is a good point and for many young teenage girls doing their own taxes can be slightly confusing. However there are plenty of daycares that would qualify as well and I bet parents would be willing to help their children figure out the tax forms to babysit through aspire… actually that could be a pretty good little side business for an entrepreneurial 17 year old I think ASPIRE pays 9.50 an hour up to 40 hours… even after taxes still lookin @ 300 a week lotta money for a young person.
I worked for Penquis Head Start for 11 years and saw, first hand the benefit of this program being in a community. It not only helps the child, but the parents and the community.
We should be putting our children first. I could write pages on this subject, but the people who want this cut would not understand. There is too much greed involved. Our greatest treasure we have are our children. And I don’t have to take a test to know it.
Do you know how many families move to ME to get on the welfare system? Thousands!! Maine is the only state the will give you welfare and Maine Care and not ask a single question! We need to stop this…if we don’t we will all be on the system and NO ONE will be working here..
According to data from the state’s Department of Health and Human Services, over five years, five times as many benefit recipients leave Maine each month compared to the number of people who move here and received assistance.
In 2006, DHHS reported that less than 1 percent of all recipients came from another state. About one-third of these were returning home, not migrating here.
More than three times as many people on public assistance move out of Maine as relocate to Maine. The top benefit for a family of three is only $485 per month, the lowest in New England. It hasn’t changed in over a decade, and isn’t likely to induce an influx of welfare refugees from other states.
You listen to LePage too much. That is simply NOT true.
He had someone ask him that once and made proceeded to lie.
You do not know what you are talking about….I work with the welfare everyday! They will tell you they moved here to get on Maine Care and welfare housing, because they can not get it anywhere as fast as you can get it in Maine. Tell me how do people that do not work at get a tax refund? We are the working class and have to pay in!!!! The first thing they do when they get that refund in buy beer and cigarettes and their kids go with out food and clothes! I sorry that their kids have to suffer for what their parents are doing. We need to stop the cycle….When they get on they system they do not want to get off.
Penny wise, pound foolish.
What a great idea this governor has, cut needed services to the most vulnerable of our state while causing job loss. Way to go…….
Convert it into a voucher program and let providers that meet stds. compete for the money. This should strip the program of all the expensive overhead and leave the classroom dollars, saving money and rolling the program back to its origins.
HEADSTART has become a top heavy feeding trough for all kinds of well paid consultants and grifters.
Not all of you are wrong but you are all missing the point. Unfortunately LePage has made cuts, we have never done his job, nor do most of us want to, but ultimately cuts need to be made somewhere and this is where he choose. The point of this article is that cuts were made to a federally funded program. The gripe should be that not all kids are being treated equally or fairly in this federally funded program. I have kids, I waited until I could afford my kids before I had them, my husband and I work hard to support our children so that you don’t have too. Because we work hard to support ourselves, our children, our home, pay for my own groceries, childcare, and healthcare my child can not go to a school, federally funded program, to make friends and get a head start on her education because I take care of us. Because we make too much money my child is not qualified for an early start on her education. Let that sink in for a minute before bashing me for taking care of my family. If this program was truly about the children and their education it would be first come first serve, every child treated equal, because it should be about the child. But I pay for a program that is rejecting my child because I work hard enough to be able to pay. So all you out there reading this from your laptop while you sit on your couch watching your TV while your child is at this program, you can thank me for being at my job paying for you to be able to do all this. You are not welcome.
while they are drankin their allen’s and smokin kools
I have said right along that we need to cut Head Start in this state. We simply can’t give these kids too big of a jump on the rest of us. By the time they are teenagers they will already know everything and not need our advice on anything! lol. Then they will become politicians when they are adults and vote to cut Head Start, so the next generation doesn’t get the jump on them. It is a never ending cycle. Please Google sarcastic humor before you opine and reply.