The federal government should provide funds/subsidies to ensure that all poor children attend pre-Sc

My opponent first states that his opinion is that the federal government should not fund education because until recently state governments only funded education. If we followed this logic, back in the 1800's and early 1900's we would disagree with allowing blacks to have equal rights, because they did not have them currently. My opponent's logic for his opinion is that we should not do new things because we currently don't do them. 1)First all my studies aren't a "guessing game". The studies compare similar children who went to pre-school with children who didn't go. The studies account for economic, sex, and other factors. There is no guessing it's a comparison. It is feasible to determine the effect of pre-school on poor kids because the studies take into account other factors that affect those kids. 2)Second your studies in Oklahoma Georgia and Tennessee unlike my studies do not take into account economic and other factors. In fact your studies compare kids who go to private schools and who are rich with very poor kids. Therefore your studies aren't very reliable comparisons. 3)Third your source is incorrect. The fact is test scores have increased since 1970. http://nces.ed.gov... Also your source is misleading and dishonest because it assumes that the increase in pre-school happened right at 1970. The fact is that test scores stalled in the 70's-80's and then began increasing in the 90's-2000's, and as my second source shows the increase in pre-school attendance occurred in the 90's and 00's and when those kids began entering 4th grade test scores began improving. http://nieer.org... 4)Countries that have higher test scores then America have pre-school attendance around 50% higher than America. http://www.oecd.org... 5)I will be referring to your source (http://www.publicpolicyforum.org...) A)Your sources talks about benefits for rich children, given that the debate is on providing pre-school to poor children these discussion on rich children are irrelevant. A reason rich children do not benefit as much from pre-school is because they have parents who do not have to work all day meaning they get nurturing care, they also can afford proper nutrition, educational games and other things. B)One section of your above source says that the pre-schools in California might not work because they are not modeled after beneficial schools in Chicago. 6)A) In the Quebec study they say that they leave out the poorest students; they don't do this because they are necessarily bias but because the data on those students was hard to find. So again this study is on rich students instead of poor students and since this debate is about poor students this study is a bit irrelevant. However I will go over the Quebec study anyways. C)One benefit that the study found was that providing pre-school/day care in Quebec caused employment for women to increase by 21% more than the rest of the country. They found that just this increase in employment effects on tax revenue offset at least 40% of the cost of pre-school. D)Here is a quote from the study, "One concern is that our findings reflect problems that families would face anyway when their children enter school; the universal childcare program simply hastened the day of reckoning." This quote means that the reason for the increase in behavior problems early on isn't an actual increase in problems but instead a shifting of when those problems occur. E)Here is another quote, "Another possibility is that our findings reflect a change in how parents answer the survey questions, rather than a change in actual behavior." What this quote eludes to is that the reason parents reported more behavior problems for their kids who were in pre-school is that those parents were not around the kids all day so when a behavior problem occurred and the parents were contacted it highlighted the problem and made it seem worse. F)Here is another quote, "Finally, we were unable to study the longer term impact of the program," My studies studied the long term effects and found massive benefits, your studies didn't study the long term effects. 7)Here is a list of 26 different studies on the effects of pre-school, all coming to the same conclusion as my first sources. That conclusion being that providing poor kids with pre-school results in less crime, higher education attainment, healthier lifestyles, better jobs, less dependence on social services and other benefits. http://www.publicpolicyforum.org... 8)Pre-school for poor students pays for itself and has massive benefits because it increases their educational attainment, resulting in lower crime, heather lifestyles and higher wages. Studies show that the lacking of a nurturing environment, and good nutrition early on in a kids life can have forever lasting negative mental impacts. Since poor kids are the most likely to not have a nurturing environment pre-school for them is exponentially more beneficial than other groups.