Government programs often begin with noble objectives. That’s the case with Head Start, created as part of President Lyndon Johnson’s (Not So) “Great Society” and designed to support low-income children with early education, family services, and nutrition.

In other words, as the two-parent household began to collapse in the 1960s, the federal government stepped in to take care of the children. For Democrats, it was the quintessential nanny state program that cost more than projected and failed to produce what it promised. Republicans, perhaps fearing the imagery of cutting a children’s program, have supported Head Start for decades and thwarted attempts by some conservatives to cut it.

Meanwhile, President Trump and a few principled Republicans wanted to scrap the program entirely last year to reduce wasteful and inefficient government services. So this year, in response to public and media backlash, a new proposal from the Trump administration within the Department of Health and Human Services seeks to streamline Head Start by cutting red tape and empowering parents and communities.

One of the primary reasons is that Head Start in its current form simply isn’t helping many children.

According to a study conducted by The Heritage Foundation, “Social science research finds that Head Start, a federally funded preschool program for children from low-income families, does not prepare children for K–12 schools, nor does it improve their social skills. Reports on spending and safety also show that Head Start centers waste money and fail to protect children. After more than six decades and more than $240 billion in federal spending, Head Start is a poor option for parents seeking childcare for their preschool-age children.”

That’s the problem with any federal safety net program. Billions of wasted dollars. Bureaucratic inefficiency. Poor results. Yet the political class keeps coming up with reasons why it’s justified to keep the federal government in control of something better done at the local level.

Naturally, anyone who comes along and states the obvious about these failed programs is criticized as cold-hearted. In the minds of Democrats and the American Civil Liberties Union (which is likely to take the feds to court over the proposed cuts), there’s no untouchable federal program.

It’s no surprise, then, that the Trump administration’s proposal is facing harsh criticism with claims that children will go hungry and never recover the education benefits. In reality, the new plan will help more children.

The president’s approach “would eliminate many existing federal rules, shifting some authority to states and local authorities; add new dietary and physical fitness requirements for students; and cap administrative overhead payments,” reports The Washington Post. “The changes could free up $2.2 billion to serve as many as 268,000 more children, administration officials said.”

More regulation might be good for government employees with time on their hands, but it’s not good for families or their children.

Citing studies showing that benefits from Head Start are minimal for children of all ages and that the program’s overall quality has diminished, the editorial board of The Wall Street Journal asks, “Could a growth in federal mandates bear some of the blame? Federal funds are conditioned on preschool providers following 133 pages of rules, which prescribe everything from how often children brush their teeth to classroom disciplinary procedures.”

“Grant recipients must ensure mental-health consultations are available at least once a month and ensure ‘collaborative relationships and partnerships with community organizations’ that administer welfare programs,” adds the Journal. “That’s more about full employment for those ‘community’ outfits than helping children. Other mandates seem intended to boost union employment — for instance, a requirement that one ‘monitor’ be present on all school buses carrying Head Start participants.”

But Head Start is only one of many programs offered at the state and local levels. As researcher Heather Mac Donald notes, “New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s proposed free childcare program is now projected by the New School for Social Research to cost $9 billion a year. The Mamdani plan is just one of many local early-education programs nationwide that run concurrently with Head Start. The existence of such programs makes it hard to credit claims that a heartless Trump administration is throwing poor children to the wolves.”

No one understands the specific needs of children better than families and local governments, which are free to keep the regulations cut from Head Start. It shouldn’t take a federal mandate to encourage children to brush their teeth. Freeing up more money for local authorities and communities to tailor these programs for the specific needs of parents and children best ensures efficiency and accountability. And parents will now have a stronger voice in how Head Start serves children.

The proposal “recognizes parents as children’s primary teachers, preserving requirements that programs engage parents and families in their children’s learning and development. HHS explains in a press release. "Parent committees that reflect the needs of families and their communities advise on the structure and curriculum, ensuring that family engagement is grounded in partnership and shared responsibility rather than compliance-driven process requirements.”

Educating and caring for children is the primary responsibility of parents, so it’s common sense that parents should be part of the process, allowing timely decisions without layers of government regulation.

HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., whose uncle created Head Start, stated, “We are removing unnecessary bureaucracy, strengthening nutrition and physical health, trusting parents and local communities, and opening Head Start to hundreds of thousands more children. That’s how we renew the promise of Head Start for the next generation.”

After many decades of wasteful spending, unaccountability, and poor results, it’s about time we take a serious look at improving Head Start for our kids. If we truly want to give them a head start in life, we need to get politicians and bureaucrats out of the way.