Hillary Clinton

Yesterday, we asked why there hasn't been more attention focused on early education issues so far in this election cycle, noting that both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have released detailed and ambitious early education agendas. Today we'll explore Senator Clinton's early education agenda. Tomorrow we'll look at Senator Obama's early education plan.

Supporting High-Quality Universal Pre-K

The centerpiece of Senator Clinton's early education agenda is her Universal Pre-k Plan, which her campaign rolled out nearly a year ago as her first major education policy proposal and one of her earliest big policy releases. Senator Clinton's plan would provide grants to states to establish high-quality pre-k programs. In order to receive funds states would have to:

Tuesday night's Democratic presidential debate featured yet another extended exchange between Sen. Hillary Clinton and Sen. Barack Obama about the merits of their respective health care plans. Health care's gotten a lot of attention in this campaign, with good reason--it's one of the biggest economic challenges facing our country, and both candidates have big, aggressive plans on it.

Yet we rarely hear much these days about another issue on which the candidates both have big, aggressive--but contrasting--plans: Early Education. Sure, the candidates toss early education into their answers to questions on other issues, and it's part of the list of policy areas where they say they'll make change. But, in all the 24 debates Democratic candidates have had so far this primary season, there hasn't been a single question specifically about early childhood education.

With Fidel Castro stepping down this weekend (see earlier TAS posts here and here), and after a bit of behind-the-scenes nudging from some of our colleagues, last night CNN and Univision asked Senators Clinton and Obama about how they would handle Cuba if they were president. And it was no brief exchange, Cuba took 9 of the debate's 90 minutes. Check it out:

The Bush administration is ratcheting up sanctions on the government of Syria. Steve Clemons comments:

GEORGE W. Bush certainly seems like he likes to strangle things. He's been trying to strangle Cuba and Cuban-American families with tightened restrictions on family-related travel to emphasize how much every President of the United States since Eisenhower has tried (and failed) to undermine Fidel Castro's government.

Now, Bush yesterday started to strangle Syria more tightly. Arguing that Syria is not doing enough to stop the movement of terrorists between Iraq and Syria, Bush issued an Executive Order increasing the number of Syrian officials whose financial assets can be held.

So -- someone on the press beat with Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, ask these two presidential hopefuls if they agree with the President's action against Syria or not? If so, why? If not, what reasons would they as President use to undo our counter this action.

I'll give you my answer. Bush's move is reckless -- and threatens to add further stress to a region that is wondering whether Bush's initiative to achieve some kind of Israel/Palestine deal is real or contrived.

America needs $1.6 trillion in public investments to get our infrastructure up to date, according to the American Society of Civil Engineers. New America's Economic Growth program, led by Sherle Schwenninger, argues that not only is it necessary, but in a time of recession, infrastructure-based stimulus is the best way to revive the economy.

So it's heartening to see that with rust-belt states coming up on the primary horizon, more presidential candidates are supporting public investment.

Voters in the District of Columbia, Maryland, and Virginia, including we here at Early Ed Watch, go to the polls today to express their choices for the 2008 Democratic and Republican presidential nominations. So we thought this is a good time to look at what the candidates have proposed on the early education front.

Here’s the good news: We’re seeing some pretty ambitious proposals on early education from the Democrats in the field. Senator Hillary Clinton would provide funds to help states create universal pre-k programs for all 4-year-olds that meet high quality standards, starting at $5 billion and ramping up to $10 billion annually in five years. She would also increase funding for the Child Care and Development Block Grant. Senator Barack Obama has pledged to invest $10 billion annually to help states create and implement comprehensive early learning systems to serve children from birth through age five, improve Head Start and childcare quality, and expand Early Head Start. He would also make the Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit partially refundable for low-income families. And both candidates have some smart ideas about supporting work-life balance to help parents spend more time with their young children. Despite some differences, both candidates are proposing serious investments that could make a real difference for American children.

What are the foreign policy implications of various presidential candidates? New America Foundation Board Member Francis Fukuyama and Senior Fellow (and Bloggingheads.tv co-founder) Robert Wright discuss.