SAN FRANCISCO, CA - State senator Dede Alpert has introduced a bill (S.7) to create state-funded preschool for all California youngsters aged three to five. Legislators, taxpayers, and parents should be concerned about this measure, which comes advertised as reform.

"We're doing more than just tinkering around the edges of the education system," explains Alpert, (D-San Diego), chairwoman of the joint legislative committee responsible for the new California Master Plan on Education. "We are addressing the whole system of education in a way that puts children first."

In Alpert's plan, preschools would now be expected to provide the social, emotional, and health services necessary for kindergarten "readiness." But there is clear evidence that universal preschool makes little difference.

"An estimated 60 percent of children already attend preschool without being dragged there by the state," argues Darcy Olsen of the Goldwater Institute and a co-author of A Brighter Future: Solutions to Policy Issues Affecting America's Children, a forthcoming publication of the Pacific Research Institute.

According to Ms. Olsen, there's no evidence that the children who don't attend preschool are shortchanged. Education Department data show the majority of America's children, those with and without formal preschool, enter kindergarten with the social and academic skills necessary for achievement.

A 1999 study by Georgia State University on the state's universal preschool program arrives at the same conclusion: "The study sample does not differ from the entire kindergarten population in GKAP capability scores."

Former assemblyman George Runner (R-Lancaster) who served on the joint legislative master plan committee, warns that "schools are not one-stop social service centers, nor should they be ... They should not be forced to address childhood factors that are the responsibility of parents, or serve as de-facto childcare providers."

While ineffective, preschool is definitely expensive. In current form, Alpert's proposal doesn't carry a price tag but the costs would be high. Teachers would need to be hired, facilities constructed, curriculum developed.

It is estimated that the entire plan would take two decades to implement fully, but Alpert hopes that elements will begin to be phased in this year. She wants the state to begin funding a select number of preschool programs.

As future budgets permit, more programs would be rolled out. Considering that the second part of S.7 makes kindergarten compulsory, it is not hard to imagine a scenario down where preschool becomes mandatory as well.

The push for universal, taxpayer-funded preschool represents a power grab by the education establishment, with teacher unions and child advocacy groups on board. Given that support, the plan is sure to gain momentum. But with a budget deficit of more than $35 billion California can't afford universal preschool, in both the fiscal and academic sense.

While a growing chorus of politicians and self-professed child advocates may try to dispute studies critical of preschool, they cannot dispute the record of California's K-12 education establishment, which is truly abysmal. To expand a failed, wasteful establishment, in a time of massive deficits, can hardly be regarded as prudent and responsible policy.

Legislators and policymakers often claim to represent the best interests of California's children. They can prove that claim by rejecting universal preschool and pushing instead for higher standards, tougher curricula, and expanded choice for parents and students.

Andrew M. Gloger is a Public Policy Fellow, Center for Entrepreneurship, at the Pacific Research Institute in San Francisco. He can be reached via email at agloger@pacificresearch.org.