The BlackBerry on my belt buzzed as I drove back to Lansing through a heavy rainstorm after attending Governor Rick Snyder’s news conference announcing a series of education reforms that included expansion of high quality early childhood programs.

“Hello, my friend,” said a well-respected philanthropist and member of the Children’s Leadership Council business executives group pushing the governor and legislature for months to adequately fund early childhood programs.

He called, though not to celebrate but to ask: “What did the governor leave out?”

An excellent question. While my answers to my business friend were short and off-the-cuff, let me give you a better idea of what is being left behind as the governor and legislature finalize the state’s 2012 fiscal year budget. A new Budget Basics report from Michigan’s Children shows how the budget affects young children more in depth, but briefly:

Child poverty. Nearly one in five Michigan children lives in dire poverty, a percentage that continues to grow. In fact, Gov. Snyder’s own dashboard unveiled during his State of the State makes reducing child poverty a goal. Yet, he and the legislature seem intent on eliminating or drastically cutting back programs that help mitigate the effects of poverty on children, particularly the very young children the governor keeps saying he wants to help become ready for school.

Case in point: Virtual elimination of the state’s Earned Income Tax Credit for the working poor. In an apparent effort to mollify critics of the idea, the House has substituted the EITC for a $25-per-child tax credit. If that stands, it means that a single mother with two children earning $15,000 a year would lose $584. For many working families struggling with low-wage jobs, that cut can be the difference between fixing an old car, buying new shoes for the kids or paying for child care.

Although all children suffer when they live in poverty, the negative impact of poverty on preschool children is especially pernicious. We know poverty in early childhood compromises children’s school success, life achievement and employment opportunities.

A recent report by Stanford University and the Center on the Developing Child says, “Emerging research in neuroscience and developmental psychology suggests that poverty early in a child’s life may be particularly harmful because the astonishingly rapid development of children’s brains leaves them sensitive (and vulnerable) to environmental conditions. Poverty and economic insecurity take a toll on a parent’s mental health, which may be an important cause of low-income parents’ non-supportive parenting. Depression and other forms of psychological distress can profoundly affect parents’ interactions with their children.”

If that isn’t bad enough, the House has eliminated a clothing allowance for most children in the Family Independence Program (FIP). For its part, the Senate kept the clothing allowance (reduced by $200,000) but is requiring that purchase cards only be used in clothing stores. (Call your legislator now to support the Senate version over the House.)

School Aid. It is baffling trying to understand how the governor and legislature can expect to improve student performance by cutting the per-pupil foundation allowance by hundreds of dollars. Yes, incentives to make needed reforms should be included, but these cuts would result in larger class sizes and elimination of many music and arts programs that make learning fun for kids. Many school districts could be forced into immediate fiscal insolvency, and we don’t expect that will help students.

Improving the dropout rate, increasing college readiness of high school grads and increasing the rate of 3rd graders reading at their level are going to be very difficult goals to reach with the types of cuts proposed.

In early childhood, the governor said, the state would set up “dashboard” measurements in key areas that we like, including “Children born healthy” and “Children healthy, thriving and developmentally on track from birth to third grade.”

How those measurements would improve when Mr. Snyder and the legislature are proposing deep cuts to the Healthy Michigan Fund is beyond my ken. The Fund now provides money for critical services like immunization support at the local level, Maternity Outpatient Medical Services, minority health services, pregnancy prevention, school health services and smoking cessation programs — all eliminated or sharply cut back under the budget working its way through the legislature now.

Programs that prevent at-risk kids from being abused or neglected — which impacts their health and school success — also are facing deep cuts even while the number of confirmed victims of child maltreatment grew 15 percent in the last decade.

More abused kids, more babies born to mothers without adequate prenatal care, more cuts to public schools that serve struggling children, less help for children living in poverty. Is that a plan for the better outcomes for children that the governor says he wants to see?

I can’t see it through all this rain.

The article was original posted in DomeMagazine.com on April 29, 2011.