Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T15:20:59.127Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Child of the Sixties: The Great Society, the New Right, and the Politics of Federal Child Care

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 August 2017

Kimberly Morgan
Kimberly Morgan
Affiliation:
New York University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In 1971, a coalition of legislators and advocates put together a bill to establish the foundations of a public, universally available day-care system in the United States. Backed by Democrats, Republicans, and a highly mobilized set of interest organizations, the bill's middle-class appeal made it seem like a political sure bet in the months preceding the 1972 election season. Over the course of 1971, however, support for the bill eroded, and by December most House Republicans had jumped ship. On December 9, President Nixon vetoed the legislation, criticizing its “fiscal irresponsibility, administrative unworkability [sic], and family-weakening implications.” Such direct federal provision of day-care services, he claimed, “would commit the vast moral authority of the National Government to the side of communal approaches to child-rearing over the family-centered approach.” The day after the veto, however, Nixon signed the 1971 Revenue Act, which included tax breaks for families who use private day-care services. In late 1972, Congress passed legislation to reauthorize Head Start, a program providing early childhood education and health services for disadvantaged, preschool-aged children. Nixon's own welfare-reform proposal included day care for poor women. Clearly, only the middle class was at risk from “communal approaches” in federally supported child care; poor families, and particularly women on welfare, could use public day care while the middle class would be subsidized to solve their child-care problems through the private sector.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Policy History , Volume 13 , Issue 2 , 2001 , pp. 215 - 250
Copyright
Copyright © The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA. 2001

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Notes

1. “Veto of the Economic Opportunity Amendments of 1971,” Public Papers of the Presidents, Richard Nixon 1971 (Washington, D.C., 1972), 1176, 1178.Google Scholar

2. “Private” in this article refers to nongovernmental child-care, including both the proprietary and nonprofit organizations that offer day-care services.

3. Tax credits tend not to benefit those with little tax liability unless they are refundable. In general, however, using the tax code as a form of social policy tends to benefit middle- and upper-income people. Sonya Michel argues that child-care initiatives have been impeded by a “divided constituency” of parents with diverging preferences ever since the 1970s. See Michel, , Children's Interests/Mothers' Rights: The Shaping of America's Child Care Policy (New Haven, 1999), chap. 7Google Scholar.

4. See Skocpol, Theda, “Targeting Within Universalism: Politically Viable Policies to Combat Poverty in the United States,” in The Urban Underclass, ed. Jencks, Christopher and Peterson, Paul E. (Washington, D.C., 1991)Google Scholar . Welfare was eliminated as a federal entitlement in 1996.

5. Baxandall, Rosalyn F., “Who Shall Care for Our Children? The History and Development of Day Care in the United States,” in Women: A Feminist Perspective, 2d ed., ed. Freeman, Jo (Palo Alto, 1979), 141 Google Scholar ; Joffe, Carol, “Why the United States Has No Child Care Policy,” in Families, Politics, and Public Policy, ed. mond, Irene (New York, 1983), 179 Google Scholar.

6. Skocpol, Theda and Amenta, Edwin, “States and Social Policies,” Annual Review of Sociology 12 (1986): 131–57Google Scholar ; Heclo, Hugh, Modern Social Policies in Britain and Sweden (New Haven, 1974)Google Scholar ; Weaver, R. Kent and Rockman, Burt A., Do Institutions Matter? Government Capabilities in the United States and Abroad (Washington, D.C., 1993)Google Scholar ; Robertson, David Brian and Judd, Dennis R., The Development of American Public Policy: The Structure of Policy Restraint (Glenview, III., 1989)Google Scholar ; Pierson, Paul, “The New Politics of the Welfare State,” World Politics 48:2 (January 1996): 152 Google Scholar ; Orloff, Ann Shola, “The Political Origins of America's Belated Welfare State,” in Politics of Social Policy in the United States, ed. Weir, Margaret, Orloff, Ann Shola, and Skocpol, Theda (Princeton, 1988)Google Scholar ; Skocpol, Theda, Protecting Soldiers and Mothers: The Political Origins of Social Policy in the United States (Cambridge, Mass., 1992)Google Scholar ; Steinmo, Sven H., “American Exceptionalism Reconsidered: Culture or Institutions?” in The Dynamics of American Politics: Approaches and Interpretations, ed. Dodd, Lawrence C. and Jillson, Calvin (Boulder, Colo., 1994)Google Scholar ; Mettler, Suzanne, Dividing Citizens: Gender and Federalism in New Deal Public Policy (Ithaca, N.Y., 1998)Google Scholar.

7. Hall, Peter, Governing the Economy: The Politics of State Intervention in Britain and France (Cambridge, 1986).Google Scholar

8. Weir, Orloff, and Skocpol, , “Understanding American Social Policies,” in Politics of Social Policy, 21–23 Google Scholar ; Immerut, Ellen M., “The Rules of the Game: The Logic of Health Policy-Making in France, Switzerland, and Sweden,” in Structuring Politics: Historical Institutionalism in Comparative Analysis, ed. Steinmo, Sven, Thelen, Kathleen, and Longstreth, Frank (Cambridge, 1992)Google Scholar.

9. Skocpol, , “The Limits of the New Deal System and the Roots of Contemporary Welfare Dilemmas,” in Politics of Social Policy; Paul Pierson, Dismantling the Welfare State? Reagan, Thatcher, and the Politics of Retrenchment (Cambridge, 1994)Google Scholar

10. Weir etal, 23.

11. Leman, Christopher, “Patterns of Policy Development: Social Security in the United States and Canada,” Public Policy 25 (Spring 1977): 261–91.Google Scholar

12. Carmines, Edward G. and Stimson, James A., Issue Evolution: Race and the Transformation of American Politics (Princeton, 1989)Google Scholar ; Edsall, Thomas Byrne with Edsall, Mary D., Chain Reaction: The Impact of Race, Rights, and Taxes on American Politics (New York, 1991)Google Scholar ; Fraser, Steve and Gerstle, Gary, eds., The Rise and Fall of the New Deal Order, 1930-1980 (Princeton, 1989)Google Scholar ; Sundquist, James L., Dynamics of the Party System: Alignment and Realignment of Political Parties in the United States, rev. ed. (Washington, D.C., 1983)Google Scholar . Note that Sundquist has a nuanced view on the extent to which this period can be labeled a “realignment,” preferring to describe this period as one of “dealignment” of voters from parties with the process of realignment furthered, but not completed, by the contested political questions of the day.

13. Auerbach, Stevanne, “What Parents Want from Day Care,” in Child Care: A Comprehensive Guide, vol. 1, ed. Auerbach, and Rivaldo, James A. (New York, 1975), 150.Google Scholar

14. Esping-Andersen argues that the 1960s and 1970s was the period of the greatest welfare-state expansion in OECD countries. See Esping-Andersen, , Social Foundations of Postindustrial Economies (New York, 1999) 2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

15. Quadagno, , The Color of Welfare: How Racism Undermined the War on Poverty (New York: Oxford University Press, 1994), 30–31.Google Scholar

16. Katznelson, Ira, “Was the Great Society a Lost Opportunity,” in New Deal Order, 200–204.Google Scholar

17. Katz, Michael B., The Undeserving Poor: From the War on Poverty to the War on Welfare (New York, 1989), 102.Google Scholar

18. Sundquist, James L., Politics and Policy: The Eisenhower, Kennedy, and Johnson Years (Washington, D.C., 1968), 205–6.Google Scholar

19. Michel, , Children's Interests/Mother's Rights, chaps. 1–2 Google Scholar ; Caldwell, Bettye M. “A Timid Giant Grows Bolder,” Saturday Review (20 February 1971): 47 Google Scholar.

20. Steinfels, Margaret O'Brien, Who's Minding the Children? The History and Politics of Day Care in America (New York, 1973), 69.Google Scholar

21. Ibid., 73-75.

22. Quadagno, , The Color of Welfare, 144.Google Scholar

23. Steiner, Gilbert Y., The Children's Cause (Washington, D.C., 1976), 23–25.Google Scholar

24. Steinfels, , Who's Minding the Children? 85.Google Scholar

25. Rosenthal, Jack, “Nursery Schools Growing Rapidly,” New York Times, 10 March 1971, 22 Google Scholar ; Steinfels, , Who's Minding the Children? 86 Google Scholar.

26. Roby, Pamela, “Child Care—What and Why?” in Child Care–Who Cares? ed. Roby, (New York, 1974), 4.Google Scholar

27. Statistical Abstract of the United States (1971), 213.Google Scholar

28. Hagen, Elizabeth, “Child Care and Women's Liberation,” in Child Care—Who Cares.? 117 Google Scholar ; Berry, Mary Frances, The Politics of Parenthood: Child Care, Rights, and the Myth of the Good Mother (New York, 1993), 127–28Google Scholar.

29. Degler, Carl, At Odds: Women and the Family in America from the Revolution to the Present (New York, 1980), 420.Google Scholar

30. Caldwell, , “Infant Day Care—the Outcast Gains Respectability,” in Child Care—Who Cares? 31 Google Scholar ; Zigler, Edward and Muenchow, Susan, Head Start: The Inside Story of America's Most Successful Educational Experiment (New York, 1992), 126 Google Scholar 27; see statement of Robert Egbert, director of Followthrough, in U.S. Congress, House, Committee on Education and Labor, Comprehensive Preschool Education Child Day-Care Act of 1969 (Washington, D.C., 1970) 388 Google Scholar , and interview with Richmond, Julius B. in Gillette, Michael L., Launching the War on Poverty: An Oral History (New York, 1996), 291 Google Scholar.

31. Harris, , American Women's Opinion Survey, no. 2050 (1970)Google Scholar ; Harris, , American Men's Opinion Survey, no. 2050 (1970)Google Scholar.

32. “Poll Supports Aid to Child Centers,” New York Times, 13 July 1969, 32.Google Scholar

33. Hoff, Joan, Nixon Reconsidered (New York, 1994)Google Scholar , chap. 4 ; Nathan, Richard P., “A Retrospective on Richard M. Nixon's Domestic Policies,” Presidential Studies Quarterly 36:1 (Winter 1996): 155 Google Scholar.

34. Steiner, , The Children's Cause, 11.Google Scholar

35. “Poverty Message,” Congressional Quarterly Almanac 1969, 34-A.Google Scholar

36. “President Lists Plans for Domestic Legislation,” Congressional Quarterly Almanac 1969, 39-A.Google Scholar

37. Steiner, , The Children's Cause, 11–12.Google Scholar

38. In 1969, the poverty level for a family of four was $3,743 . Current Population Reports P23, no. 37 (24 June 1971)Google Scholar.

39. Phillips, Kevin, “The Day-Care Trap,” Washington Post, 20 May 1971, A19 Google Scholar

40. Iglehart, John K., “Congress Presses Major Child-Care Program Despite White House Veto Threat,” National journal, 23 October 1971, 2126.Google Scholar

41. U.S. House Committee on Education and Labor , Comprehensive Child De velopment Act of 1971, 92d Cong., 1st sess., 1971, 194–95, 403, 406Google Scholar.

42. Quadagno, , The Color of Welfare, 151.Google Scholar

43. Judy Riggs, interview by the author, Washington, D.C., 15 September 1997; Richard Warden, interview by the author, Washington, D.C., 18 September 1997; see also Berry, 140.

44. This interviewee prefers to remain anonymous. Others who have noted the weakness of feminist mobilization around day care in this period include Martha Phillips, interview by the author, Washington, D.C., 30 July 1997 ; Norgren, Jill, “In Search of a National Child Care Policy: Background and Prospects,” Western Political Quarterly 34:1 (March 1981): 133 CrossRefGoogle Scholar ; Joffe, 177-78.

45. Zigler, and Muenchow, , Head Start, 111, 126-27, 132–33.Google Scholar

46. Phillips, interview.

47. Beck, Rochelle and Butler, John, “An Interview with Marian Wright Edelman,” Harvard Educational Review 44:1 (February 1974): 69.Google Scholar

48. Patterson, , America's Struggle Against Poverty: 1900-1980 (Cambridge, Mass., 1981), 138–41.Google Scholar

49. Quadagno, , The Color of Welfare, chap. 2 Google Scholar ; Edsall, and Edsall, , Chain Reaction, 66–68 Google Scholar.

50. Quoted in Zigler, and Muenchow, , Head Start, 110.Google Scholar

51. Tomkins, Calvin, “A Sense of Urgency,” New Yorker, 27 March 1989, 60–64 Google Scholar ; Quadagno, , The Color of Welfare, 40–41 Google Scholar.

52. Zigler, and Muenchow, , Head Start, 65–67, 134.Google Scholar

53. Riggs, interview.

54. Beck, and Butler, , “An Interview with Marian Wright Edelman,” 68.Google Scholar

55. Warden, interview.

56. Ibid.

57. U.S. House Committee on Education and Labor, Child Development Act, 404-5, 482-83.

58. Steiner, , The Children's Cause, 101.Google Scholar

59. Mattin L. LaVor, interview by the author, Washington, D.C., 1 July 1997; Hon. John Brademas, telephone interview by the author, 4 August 1997.

60. U.S. House Committee on Education and Labor, Child Development Act, 465–67.Google Scholar

61. This interviewee prefers to remain anonymous.

62. Warden, interview.

63. Phillips, interview.

64. Zigler, and Muenchow, , Head Start, 143–44.Google Scholar

65. Congressional Record, 92d Congress, lstsess., 1971, vol. 117, part 26: 34284–88.Google Scholar

66. U.S. House Committee on Education and Labor, Child Development Act, 362–63, 174–77, 217–21Google Scholar . See similar testimony by Tennessee Gov. Winfield Dunn and Pennsylvania Gov. Milton J. Sharp, 400-401, 476-77.

67. Shelley, Mack C. II, The Permanent Majority: The Conservative Coalition in the United States Congress (Tuscaloosa, 1983), 4.Google Scholar

68. In part, the success of the coalition stemmed from the use of recorded tellet votes on amendments, a practice that did not exist prior to 1970. This practice enabled it to defeat liberal amendments that hitherto had sailed through Congress. See “Conservative Coalition: Dramatic Increase in 1971,” Congressional Quarterly Almanac (1971), 84–85 Google Scholar.

69. Roth, William, “The Politics of Daycare,” Transaction (January–February 1982): 65–66.Google Scholar

70. Quoted in Iglehart, John K., “Congress Presses Major Child-Care Program Despite White House Veto Threat,” National Journal, 23 October 1971, 2129.Google Scholar

71. “Congress Extends Anti-Poverty Program Through 1974,” Congressional Quarterly Almanac (1972), 599–607.Google Scholar

72. Zigler, and Muenchow, , Head Start, 146.Google Scholar

73. Congressional Quarterly Almanac (1972), 518.Google Scholar

74. Thompson, Kenneth W., ed., The Nixon Presidency: 22 Intimate Perspectives of Richard M. Nixon (Lanham, Md., 1987), 125.Google Scholar

75. Iglehart, John K., “Dems Term Richardson ‘Administration liberal,’” National Journal, 20 November 1971, 2321.Google Scholar

76. Colson, Charles W., discussant, in Richard M. Nixon: Politician, President, Administrator, ed. Friedman, Leon and Levanttosser, William F. (New York, 1991), 275–76Google Scholar ; see Halderman notes on Buchanan memo, 23 September 1971, White House Special Files, Staff Member and Office Files, Patrick]. Buchanan, Box 3, The Nixon Project, National Archives (hereafter referred to as NP, NA).

77. Louis Harris Poll, August 1971, White House Special Files, Staff Member and Office Files, H. R. Haldeman, Box 83, NP, NA.

78. Memorandum to the President, 21 October 1970, White House Special Files Staff Member and Office Files, John D. Ehrlichman, Box 23, NP, NA.

79. Hoff-Wilson, Joan, ed., Papers of the Nixon White House. Part 2, President's Meeting File, 1969-1974 (Frederick, Md., 1987), 70–11-29, microfiche, A03-04.Google Scholar

80. Phillips, Kevin, “Day-Care Trap.”Google Scholar

81. Quadagno, , The Color of Welfare, 152–53.Google Scholar

82. See Nixon's handwritten notes on William Shannon article, Papers of the Nixon White House. Part 6. Documents Annotated by the President, microfiche, 6A-218-31.

83. Papers of the Nixon White House. Part 4, Ehrlichman Alphabetical Subject File, microfiche, 4-106-86.

84. Memorandum from Ehrlichman, 30 January 1970, Papers of the Nixon White House Memorandum from Ehrlichman, 30 January 1970Google Scholar, Papers of the Nixon White House. Part 6, President's Office Files. Series A. Documents Annotated b} the President, 1969-1974, ed. Hoff-Wilson, , microfiche, 6A-61–43Google Scholar.

85. Jeff Bell, telephone interview by the author, 3 September 1997.

86. Notes of Meetings with the President, 15 November 1971, White House Special Files, Staff Members and Office Files, John D. Ehrlichman, Box 6, NP, NA.

87. Memorandum from Jon M. Huntsman, 11 November, 1971, in Papers of the Nixon White House. Part 4, Ehrlichman Alphabetical Subject File, ed. Hoff-Wilson, , microfiche, 4-33–18Google Scholar.

88. Congressional Record, 92d Congress, lstsess., 1971, vol. 117, part 32: 41890.

89. Letter to Rita Hauer, 10 January 1972, White House Special Files, Staff Member and Office Files, Patrick J. Buchanan, Chronological File 1972, Box 2, NP, NA.

90. Dave Keene, interview by the author, Washington, D.C., 24 September 1997.

91. Memorandum from Buchanan to Ehrlichman and Ken Cole, 12 October 1971, White House Special Files, Staff Member and Office Files, Patrick J. Buchanan, Box 3, NP, NA.

92. Keene, interview.

93. Congressional Record, 92d Congress, lstsess., 1971, vol. 117, part 34: 38170.

94. Human Events, 18 September 1971, 4–5.Google Scholar

95. “Nixon Must Veto Child Contro l Law,” Human Events, 9 October 1971, 1, 10.Google Scholar

96. Feulner, Edwin J., Conservatives Staik the House: The Republican Study Committee, 1972-80 (Ottawa, III., 1983), 39–40.Google Scholar

97. Speech at Illinois Agriculture Association Dinner, 17 November 1971, reprinted in Congressional Record, 92d Congress, 1st sess., 1971, vol. 117, part 34: 44126-27.

98. Feulner, , Conservatives Stalk the House, 50–55.Google Scholar

99. Memorandum to C. Colson and H. R. Haldeman, 26 October 1971; memorandum to D. Keene, 26 October 1971; memorandum to H. R. Haldeman, 3 December 1971, White House Special Files, Staff Member and Office Files, PatrickJ. Buchanan, Box 3, NP, NA.

100. Article was read and underlined by Nixon, 1 August 1971, White House Special Files, Staff Member and Office Files, H. R. Haldeman, Box 83, NP, NA.

101. Congressional Record, 92d Congress, lst sess., 1971, vol. 117, part 32: 41890.Google Scholar

102. Memorandum to Haldeman and Colson, 26 October 1971, White House Special Files, Staff Members and Office Files, Patrick J. Buchanan, Box 3, NP, NA.

103. Public Papers of the Presidents: Richard M.Nixon, 1971 (Washington, D.C.), 1176–78.Google Scholar

104. Steiner, , The Children's Cause, 116.Google Scholar

105. Iglehart, John K., “Expensive Senate Child-Care Package Faces Dim Prospects in House,” National Journal, 22 July 1972, 1202–5.Google Scholar

106. Feulner, 50-54.

107. Weyrich, Paul, “Family Issues,” in Phillips, Howard, ed., The New Right at Harvard (Vienna, Va., 1983), 18–19.Google Scholar

108. Hixson, Walter B. Jr, Search for the American Right Wing: An Analysis of the Social Science Record (Princeton, 1992), 214–15.Google Scholar

109. Human Events, 18 October 1975, 22.Google Scholar

110. U.S. Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare, Background Materials Concerning the Child ana1 Family Services Act, 1975, 94th Congress, 2d sess., 1976, 17.Google Scholar

111. Ibid., 68.

112. Steiner, , The Futility of Family Policy (Washington, D.C., 1981), 92.Google Scholar

113. Ibid., 245-46.

114. Beck, Rochelle, “The Child Care Policy Stalemate: An Analysis of Federal Policies and an Examination of Options for the 1980s” (Ph.D. dissertation, Harvard University, 1980), chap. 3.Google Scholar

115. In a 1980 survey of persons 18 or over, 66 percent of respondents reported that it would be a “good thing” if “[d]ay care centers and other child care services outside the home became more common.” Harris, , Survey on Family Life in America, 20 November—11 December 1980 Google Scholar.

116. Zigler, and Muenchow, , Head Start, 143.Google Scholar

117. Phillips, Howard, “A New Right Perspective,” in New Right at Harvard, 9.Google Scholar

118. Brademas, interview.

119. Nelson, John R. Jr and Warring, Wendy E., “The Child Care Tax Deduction/Credit,” in Making Policies for Children, ed. Haynes, Cheryl D. (Washington, D.C., 1982), 222 Google Scholar , 230. See also Michel, , Children's Interests/Mothers' Rights, chap. 7 Google Scholar.

120. Nelson, and Warring, , “The Child Care Tax Deduction/Credit,” 241.Google Scholar

121. Besharov, Douglas J. and Tramontozzi, Paul N., “Federal Child Care Assistance: A Growing Middle-Class Entitlement,” Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 8:2 (1989): 316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

122. Howard, Christopher, The Hidden Welfare State: Tax Expenditures and Social Policy in the United States (Princeton, 1997).Google Scholar

123. Congressional Record, 92d Congress, 1st sess., 1971, vol. 117, part 31: 41252–54.Google Scholar

124. Howard, , The Hidden Welfare State, 11, 179–80.Google Scholar

125. M. Phillips, interview.

126. For example, see debates in the Congressional Record, 92d Congress, 1st sess., 1971, vol. 117, part 31: 40933–34Google Scholar ; 41251-55 ; Congressional Record, 92d Congress, 2d sess., 1972, vol. 118, part 26: 33869–71Google Scholar.

127. Warden, interview; Featherstone, Joseph, “The Day Care Problem: Kentucky Fried Children,” The New Republic, 5-12 September 1970, 12–16.Google Scholar

128. Gilder, George, Sexual Suicide (New York, 1973), 155.Google Scholar

129. Schlafly, Phyllis, “Big Mama's Federal Baby-Sitting Act,” Conservative Digest 14:5 (May-June 1988): 85.Google Scholar

130. Petchesky, Rosalind Pollack, “Antiabortion, Antifeminism, and the Right of the New Right,” Feminist Studies 7:2 (Summer 1981): 207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

131. Gilder, , Sexual Suicide, 163.Google Scholar

132. “Nixon Must Veto Child Control Law,” Human Events, 9 October 1971, 10.Google Scholar

133. Schlafly, Phyllis, The Power of the Positive Woman (New Rochelle, N.Y., 1977), 87–92 Google Scholar , 159. See also various issues of the Phyllis Schlafly Report through the 1980sGoogle Scholar.

134. Keene, interview; Michael Stern, telephone interview hy the author, 4 September 1997.

135. Kilpatrick, James J., “Nixon Was Right to Reject Child Care Bill,” Human Events, 1 January 1972, 6.Google Scholar

136. Gilder, , “Nixon's Breakthrough in Social Policy,” Ripon Forum 8:3 (February 1972): 11–12.Google Scholar

137. Kamerman, Sheila B. and Kahn, Alfred J., “Child Care and Privatization Under Reagan,” in Privatization and the Welfare State, ed. Kamerman, and Kahn, (Princeton, 1989), 238–39, 246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

138. Long, Sharon K. et al., Child Care Assistance Under Welfare Reform: Early Responses by the States (Washington, D.C., 1998).Google Scholar

139. Interview with Sugarman, Jule M., in Launching the War on Poverty, 230 Google Scholar

140. Zigler, and Muenchow, , Head Start, 68, 78–80.Google Scholar

141. LaVor, interview.

142. Kuntz, Kathryn R., “A Lost Legacy: Head Start's Origins in Community Action,” in Critical Perspectives on Project Head Start: Revisioning the Hope and Challenge eds. Ellsworth, Jeanne and Ames, Lynda J. (Albany: SUNY Press, 1998), 32 Google Scholar ; Zigler, and Muenchow, , Head Start, 111–13Google Scholar.

143. Keene, interview.

144. Zigler, and Muenchow, , Head Start, 202.Google Scholar

145. Borden, Enid and O'Beirne, Kate Walsh, “False Start? The Fleeting Gains at Head Start,” Policy Review 47 (Winter 1989).Google Scholar

146. Zigler, and Muenchow, , Head Start, 120–22, 184-86.Google Scholar

147. Vinovskis, Maris A., “Early Childhood Education: Then and Now,” Daedalus 122:1 (Winter 1993): 164 Google Scholar ; Katz, Jeffrey L., “Head Start Funding Nears Legislative Crossroad,” Congressional Quarterly, 5 March 1994, 541–43Google Scholar.

148. Howard, , The Hidden Welfare State, 191.Google Scholar

149. Parents answering “very satisfied” or “somewhat satisfied” with their child-care arrangements . Harris, , Family Survey II—Child Care, no. 883013 (1988)Google Scholar . See also Michel, , Children's Interests/Mothers' Rights, chap. 7 Google Scholar.

150. Robertson, David Brian, “Introduction: Loss of Confidence and Policy Change in the 1970s,” Journal of Policy History 10:1 (1998): 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar