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
- In our opinion: Paul Ryan's promising...
- Involve Utahns in national monument designations
- Carmen Rasmusen Herbert: Becoming mentally...
- Letter: Welfare reform
- Legitimate, productive businesses are...
- In our opinion: Federal contracting executive...
- In our opinion: Timing is right for the...
- Helping kids master what matters: Emotions,...
- In our opinion: The Affordable Care Act... 80
- Can a news channel 'solve problems'? 54
- In our opinion: Paul Ryan's promising... 53
- Capitalism and the common good:... 45
- Join the discussion: Is feminism... 39
- In our opinion: Timing is right for the... 39
- My view: A global warming solution to... 36
- In our opinion: Federal contracting... 36