Taking Care of Nebraska's Kids

 By Marilyn Moore

Gov. Pillen concludes nearly every speech with a reference to his goals: grow Nebraska, cut taxes, make things good for agriculture and business, and “take care of Nebraska’s kids.”  I agree with taking care of Nebraska’s kids. I suspect most educators do.  I’m pretty sure most parents and grandparents do.  In fact, I would wager that nearly every thinking person in the state would agree with that goal; “after all, kids are our future,” is a common sentiment. There’s not likely an urban/rural divide on this one, nor on any of the other demographics that so frequently polarize conversation about social and political issues.  “Taking care of Nebraska’s kids” might be just about as popular as Nebraska volleyball, and that’s saying a lot.

Where we might have some differences of opinions would be in how we go about achieving that goal…just how do we (that’s the State of Nebraska “we”) take care of our kids?  Government has been described as coming together to do that collectively which we cannot do alone.  Things like build highways, fight wars, enforce laws, and, in the words of the US Constitution, “promote  the general welfare.”  I think taking care of kids falls in that provision…a recognition that government has a role to play in making lives good for the people who live here.  

When I think of taking care of Nebraska kids, I think first of the absolutely basic necessities that children need to live, including adequate nutrition, safe water, secure homes.  Most times, most parents can and do provide these basic necessities for most children.  But not always.  For decades, governmental assistance has been available to fill in the gaps.  Not perfectly, not consistently, not without arguments about cost and benefit, but in the end, most folks agree that children should have food, and safe water, and a safe place to live.  

If we’re going to take care of Nebraska kids, it would seem to me that we would want to grab every resource that helps meet these needs for kids.  Resources like federal dollars that provide funds for low-income families to purchase additional food when their children are home during the summer, when the children don’t have access to school breakfasts and school lunches, meals that for many children are their most reliable and most consistent source of nutrition during the school year.  But Nebraska, along with a handful of other states, has declined to participate in this program, a program that would help about 150,000 children, Nebraska kids.  Sen. Day has proposed a bill that would commit Nebraska to participation in this program in 2025, as we’ve missed our opportunity for 2024.  Supporting this legislation would be a real and visible commitment to taking care of Nebraska kids.

Safe water.  Water is a big deal in Nebraska.  It’s one of our most treasured resources.  It makes an agricultural industry possible.  We’re trying to get more of it from Colorado, to assure that a contract signed in the 1930’s that assures us of our fair share from the South Platte River crosses the state line to Nebraska.  Lincoln is beginning the staggering task of developing a second source of water for our growing city.  We pay attention to drought maps, because we know it matters.  There is concern that large, out-of-state people and companies and countries might buy Nebraska land in order to get Nebraska water.  All evidence of our understanding of how important water is.  And, we know that quantity is not the only concern; water safety ranks right up there, too.  Except when it doesn’t….when large scale corporate practices result in run-off that pollutes the water, resulting in dangerously high levels of nitrates and other chemicals.  Remember the AltEn disaster outside of Mead?  Or recent reports of high nitrate levels from runoff from hog farms?  We know from experiences elsewhere, such as the contaminated water from lead pipes in Flint, Michigan, that unsafe water results in life-long damage to growing children.  If we’re going to take care of Nebraska’s kids, we need to assure that the water they drink is safe.  

In addition to the need for food and water to support physical growth (which of course affects cognitive and social growth), Nebraska kids need safe and nurturing childcare during their first five years.  Our governor recognizes that childcare is a need in the state, because businesses have made it known that childcare is related to their ability to hire workers.  With 900 children on a waitlist for childcare in Lincoln, it’s pretty easy to guess that the number statewide is in the tens of thousands.  To eliminate that waitlist will take space, it will take staff (who are among the lowest-paid workers), and it will likely take a complex public/private partnership to meet the need.  My own suggestion would be universal pre-school for four-year-olds, and in many communities with declining school enrollments, the space is already there.  Not an easy implementation, statewide, but worth it, because it would be another step in taking care of Nebraska kids.

Another need for Nebraska kids?  Public schools with all the supports and opportunities for children to reach their promise and potential. In Nebraska, 90% of students are in public schools. The local school is the lifeblood of many rural communities and of many neighborhoods in urban settings.  It’s a place to belong, a place to be safe.  It’s the place where every day, adult eyes are on kids, noticing who may need a helping hand.  About public schools, our governor is proposing hard spending caps, with a goal of reducing property taxes.  Hard spending caps will result in fewer opportunities for Nebraska kids…classes that won’t be offered because the enrollment is too small, or increased fees for activities that make participation prohibitive for many families, or elimination of early intervention programs that serve a small number of students, but the students who most need them.  These are not practices that take care of Nebraska kids…but they are the inevitable result of hard spending caps.  Doing more with less is a popular slogan, but the fact of the matter is, in any business that is people-dependent, having less generally means being able to do less.  

In post-pandemic years, there are nationwide reports of increased mental health needs in every segment of the population.  That is true in Nebraska, and that is true with Nebraska kids.  We need more counselors, more psychologists, more mental health providers, in schools and in private practice and in public agencies.  A hard cap on local governments, e.g., schools, and searching for “efficiencies” (like increasing the case load of providers and caseworkers) in state and county agencies, will not result in more mental health services.  And that’s not taking care of Nebraska’s kids.

And one other area…taking care of Nebraska LGBTQ kids.  They’re feeling particularly singled out and diminished right now, partly because of last year’s contentious legislative debate.  Trans kids, especially.  Some are now forced to leave the state to receive the medical care that is necessary for their physical and mental health, a health plan that was decided upon by the kid, the parents, and the health care providers.  Let’s help these Nebraska kids by leaving them and their families alone and staying out of their health care decisions. 

I recognize that in every organization, just as in every family, there are times that there are competing goals, and hard decisions and trade-offs must be made.  Of all the state’s goals, “taking care of Nebraska kids” ranks number one on my list, and I intend to lend my voice in support of that goal when legislation that affects Nebraska kids is being considered.  I hope you will do the same.  

Like us and follow us on Facebook @5 Women Mayhem.