>I don't see the
>need for that kind of law in aiding kindergarten students with
>crayons and safety scissors, when that stuff is largely
>inconsequential to their learning anyhow.

This stuff is not largely inconsequential. A lot of teachers for children 4-6 will have masters degrees where you’ll find teachers for ages 7-14 will not. It doesn’t mean one age group has better teachers and the others do not, but there’s a lot more to consider when teaching very young children than most people think. Learning to cut with their little plastic safety scissors and getting the “I can cut in a straight line award” isn’t only something to make the children feel good and have fun but it’s to test their fine motor skills. Kindergarten programs are developed to test students on multiple levels with tools like their little scissors. Tons of children are held back in Kindergarten for an extra year, not because they don’t know their letters and can’t read basic words but because they are falling behind in some other aspect of development. Of course various developmental aspects often overlap.

When it comes to helping college level students, sure something more can be done. At the same time, you can’t go to college if you can’t start with kindergarten. And college is elective whereas elementary school is not.

To me, I think government money would do better to educate parents to save their own money for their children. I know when I went to college, I was not permitted to have any sort of government financial aid due to the fact that my mother’s income (a single parent) was well over the limit for aid (compounded with I was not 24, I did not have a child, I was not married). She had zero savings for either of her daughters, which is sad. The saddest part about it is she didn’t even think about the need to save for something so expensive until it came time for college preparation. Personally, from my experiences even though I do not have children I’m already saving for prospective children. I plan to have a child/children within three years or so, and saving now will ensure they can go to the school of their choice without significant hassle. When I look at my friends that have children now, none of them are thinking about saving for their children. Some of them have kids that are already eight. That’s only ten more years before those big tuition bills start rolling in. They all have professional jobs and make an income that could be judged as higher middle class, yet they have no savings. I think it’s unfair to expect families that cannot do anything for themselves (aside from buying some giant house with rooms they don’t use or an over powered gas guzzling SUV when they only have two kids) to be given a free ticket for higher education. If money is really tight, a teenager can always work their ass off in the summers to help cushion the cost.

Solution to the problem? Like I said, education. This can be something that when you go to register your child in K-12 you are provided with information about savings programs specifically for college. It doesn’t cost the government that much money to include extra pamphlets. Especially with their first child, a lot of parents will want to read and review and sometimes save everything that comes with that first school year process. If parent are given this information early on, I think there’s a possibility for change. Some local banks even have quarter programs. They give you little folders to hold quarters and when it’s full with like five bucks you can deposit it into a no fee interest savings account specifically for your child's education. How hard is it to put a few quarters in a card every week? Even if a quarter cards aren’t going to pay for all of your child’s education needs, something is better than nothing and all those quarters over 18 years are going to add up.

Then you can start saying it’s a war against the “haves” and the “have overtime” not “have nots”.