As part of the National Day of Action on early learning, CAHS and our partners at the New England Consortium have sent a letter to our Senators (PDF) asking for their support in expanding early care and education programs in the US.
Connecticut has been leading in early care and education for years. The state has just completed a year-long early care and education system planning process involving key stakeholders. Following a blueprint created by the planning team, we are moving ahead with a proposal to establish a new Office of Early Childhood to create a more streamlined and coordinated system of early childhood in Connecticut. The state is also working to improve important quality markers like program accreditation and staff education despite struggling to attract and retain the top teachers due to rates that have not been increased since 2002.
These and other current programs, however, have been weakened by the sequester. The President´s early care and education initiative is a great step to reverse these cuts and expand these services nation wide. In Connecticut we have seen how these programs can help. We know that investing in early care and education is a cost-effective strategy that results in signifi
cant savings for federal, state, and local governments through decreased spending on education remediation and special education, less crime, improved health outcomes, higher high school graduation and college matriculation rates, decreased dependenc
The President´s plan would provide additional resources for Connecticut that will enable the state to increase the footprint of these initiatives. The first year alone will enable more than 2,600 kids to receive quality childcare, more than 8,000 mothers will benefit from the expanded home visiting program.e on welfare and increased tax revenues.
We need these programs - and we need strong leaders in the US Senate and in Connecticutto move them forward.
Obama’s “Buffet Rule”, named after billionaire investor Warren E. Buffett, first surfaced in 2011 to establish that taxpayers earning more than $1 million should not pay a lower effective tax rate than lower income taxpayers. This was based on the widely publicized statement from the billionaire himself that he should not pay less of his income in taxes than his secretary (though I believe the politically correct term is now “Administrative Assistant”).
Obama’s latest budget request updated the rule to have households earning at least $1 million pay a minimum effective tax of 30 percent. Since it was presented as principle rather than a formal tax proposal, it was Senator Sheldon Whitehouse who then wrote the proposal as separate legislation. The new alternative minimum income tax of 30 percent would impact around 210,000 people making at least $2 million annually, and would then phase in the higher rate for those earning at least $1 million. The Senate will vote around 5:30 this evening on a motion to proceed to this legislation.
The revenue from implementing the rule would bring in about $314 billion more than letting the Bush tax cuts for millionaires expire. When people who are most underserved are being turned away for home energy assistance, job training, child care, housing, and education, and devastating cuts are being proposed for SNAP (formerly food stamps, and eventually we can all just accept that it has a new name) Medicaid and Medicare, it seems only fair that millionaires and billionaires chip in their fair share.