Apparently, some legislators want more regulation of day care. At present, if you care for 12 or fewer kids a day care is not "regulated." From this morning's Argus Leader:
South Dakota has the highest percentage of young children in day care in the nation.
That's quite interesting. Here are some more numbers:
A University of South Dakota study funded by the Annie E. Casey Foundation concluded that 73 percent of South Dakota's children ages 6 and younger spent weekdays at a sitter. The study said child care is a $124.5 million industry in South Dakota, and some involved in the study said the estimate is probably conservative.
The high percentage of children in child care is one natural consequence of the fact that South Dakota has one of the highest rates of two-income families in the nation, and 77.5 percent of working women in the state have a child younger than 6. The national average is 63.5 percent, according to data compiled by South Dakota Kids Count and the University of South Dakota.
So should there be more regulation? I have no idea. I remember me and bunch of other Madison kids would be babysat by the wife of a local feed/seed salesman. Big yard, they had horses, and lots of 'spaghettios' were served. I imagine if she had to mess around with "regulations" she wouldn't have done it. That's one possible consequence--regulations can shrink supply of an economic good if sunk costs grow.
Speaking of regulation, the Argus Leader is opining this morning about the wisdom of the Sioux Falls city council mandating that new homes have sump pump systems. Is this necessary? I have no idea. But it does seem that the first institutional response is to regulate. I wish a big commission could be organized to study the state- and city-based regulatory environment in South Dakota. In the early 1970s, there was a big effort to consolidate a whole bunch of different regulatory agencies in Pierre. I'm not sure it did much good, but perhaps another look-see would be wise.
Recent Comments