Reworking, not money, best for child care policy

Rather than throw more money at a perceived problem, perhaps Louisiana should reconceptualize how it addresses child care.

Money that the country didn’t have was thrown at states, through federal government grants, during the Wuhan coronavirus pandemic to give families – read single parents mostly mothers, who comprise the vast bulk of Child Care Assistance Program recipients – more money to pay for child care. The program will subsidize at varying amounts (plus for some a small co-payment) depending on family resources for at least part-time working or training parents with children under age 13 (18 if with disability) and who are citizens or legal residents.

While the leftist agenda of growing government and hoping it sticks lasted well after the pandemic could be used as a justification for it, eventually the bonus money faded away. Regardless, Louisiana chronically has had a waiting list for participation, even as it has chipped in the range of $80 million annually over the last few years (the federal government will provide a match for state spending).

Fully funded ESA program to give LA boost

Real world experience may have mooted the argument against Louisiana implementing fully its GATOR program on cost considerations.

This program provides an education savings account for public schoolchildren of school age (5-21) who have an income at or below 250 percent of the federal poverty limit. It may be spent on tuition or a number of other services or items related to education. Eventually, it will expand first to incorporate families up to the 400 percent level, then finally open to all families regardless of income level.

However, this depends upon legislative appropriation to fund it for all eligible families, which could cost in the $100 million range just to fulfill all requests from the first cohort. It could double that to fulfill the others. Instead, for the past couple of years the Legislature allocated basically enough only to cover participating families in the prior version of the program predicated on allowing escape from failing schools, around $43 million.

Defeat spendthrift Caddo’s sports boondoggle

Overtaxed Caddoans, get set to receive a sales pitch this week about a low-priority sports complex that won’t come close to paying for itself, whether measured tangibly or intangibly.

In three sessions, the parish will present an idea for a complex that will allow for a variety of indoor sports – including pickleball, on which last year it already blew $10 million for a dedicated facility on land owned by the Northwest Louisiana YMCA. Outdoor sports around it also remain a possibility.

Perhaps it could have used that $10 million as it says the parish through debt issuance will cover only $60 million of a projected $70 million cost and apparently has hat in hand for that remainder. As of yet Caddo Parish commissioners haven’t decided where to put it, which they might want to do as voters will decide on whether to grant that debt request Nov. 3.

LA politicians shouldn’t back college subversion

It might make for good politics, but it’s bad law and devalues education for politicians to support efforts, encouraged by Louisiana State University, to allow professional athletes to play their sport at Louisiana institutions of higher learning.

As college football has begun, much attention has focused on the efforts of a number of former college players who participated in National Football League camps who wish to return to playing in college after their attempts to latch onto an NFL team failed. They do so on the basis of a ruling made by the National Collegiate Athletic Association, a group of conferences comprised of different school classified into different competitive categories, at summer’s beginning that allows five years of eligibility for athletes.

The previous rule had allowed only four years, except for extenuating circumstances most often caused by injury that had a student missing much of a season. The new rule gives everybody five years, although additional eligibility could be granted only under uncommon circumstances.