Pubdate: Fri, 11 Dec 2009
Source: Honolulu Star-Bulletin (HI)
Copyright: 2009 Honolulu Star-Bulletin
Contact: http://archives.starbulletin.com/forms/letterform.html
Website: http://www.starbulletin.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/196
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/dare.htm (D.A.R.E.)

IT IS POSSIBLE TO SCALE BACK IN TIGHT TIMES

Government officials should always be prudent with taxpayers' money,
demanding proof that programs are working as intended rather than
blindly funding them year after year.

Of course, that doesn't always happen, and money for nothing is
easiest to come by when the economy is soaring and the coffers are
full. It's impossible to justify such spending in a downturn, but
still difficult for bureaucrats to cut programs that outspoken
constituents have come to rely on -- whether those programs meet core
goals or not.

So it's worth praising the recent actions of Honolulu Police Chief
Louis Kealoha and state Human Services Director Lillian Koller, who by
demanding effective outcomes for spending and focusing on helping the
broadest population with the least available resources, set an example
for other public officials to follow.

The new police chief is vowing to refocus on core services -- such as
patrol officers and criminal investigations -- and to cut back as
necessary on prevention, education, intervention and counseling programs.

Among those education programs is D.A.R.E. (Drug Abuse Resistance
Education), intended to help kids resist the peer pressure to use
alcohol, drugs and tobacco. The popular program brings police officers
into schools, providing students a positive role model in law
enforcement and encouragement to stay on the right path. There are
sure to be howls of protests from parents and principals who want to
save it.

The only problem: Researchers debunked D.A.R.E. years ago. No less
than the U.S. General Accounting Office reported in 2003 that six
long-term evaluations found no significant differences in illicit drug
use between D.A.R.E. students and those who had not been in the
program. Kealoha is correct to reassess its funding.

At the Department of Human Services, Koller stood firm in scaling back
day-care subsidies, rightly preserving the most aid for the neediest
families in a $66 million annual program primarily intended to provide
high-quality preschool for the children of lower-income working families.

Koller explained that 56 percent of the participants were using
taxpayers' money to pay relatives to take care of their kids. Only 21
percent of the total subsidies -- a maximum of $1,395 per month per
child -- went to licensed preschools. Children are eligible from birth
to age 13.

The program also created a disincentive for parents to advance their
careers, as they risked losing the entire subsidy if their earnings
rose even $1 past the ceiling.

There is no doubt that Koller's restructuring will have an adverse
impact on many families, and a trickle-down effect on the relatives
and child-care facilities they are paying. But absent any changes, the
program would have been broke by March, so she made a difficult but
necessary decision to preserve the largest subsidies for the neediest
families.

The heads of every state and county agency face tough choices as
budgets shrink. They would do well to emulate Kealoha and Koller and
ensure that taxpayers get the most for their money.