I understand that many children are disadvantaged because of language barriers and working parents, etc., but wasn't Head Start begun for that very reason, to help these children? Many other children are brought up in homes with great parents and many advantages and they are better off in the hands of their parents for their early learning. It seems the expenditure of $3 million to fund UPSTART locally to just experiment is a waste of precious dollars. There already are many studies as to the advantages of the current Head Start program.
Why can't an existing program be perfected, if there is proof that it is working, rather than begin a new, costly program?
Salt Lake City
- Who said it: Reagan or Clinton?
- Doug Robinson: Making sense of retired...
- Jay Evensen: Forest Service photo rules are...
- Janna Darnelle: Redefining marriage hurts...
- 5 reasons Mitt Romney will probably run for...
- Letter: Sluggish global warming
- Letter: Campaign disservice
- Carmen Rasmusen Herbert: For my grandpa
- Janna Darnelle: Redefining marriage... 109
- 5 reasons Mitt Romney will probably run... 67
- John Hoffmire: Save capitalism by... 47
- In our opinion: Here's how the Obama... 41
- Drew Clark: Either view of marriage... 40
- Letter: Sluggish global warming 35
- Robert Bennett: Make climate... 30
- Letter: Enforcing the dress code 30