The huge–it’s called “omnibus”–appropriations bill that passed the House and Senate this week includes an increase in federal spending for preK education, although apparently not funding specifically for President Obama’s proposed preK program.

There is no consensus on how effective current preK schooling is–not a surprise, perhaps, because of the strong political interests involved (is Head Start a worthy investment, or not), how varied the different preK offerings are, and how important family background and support is to educational success.

Would expanded government investment in preK education be good for children whose parents are unable to afford such schooling now? Greater government funding can mean making preK schooling more accessible to poor families.

But an expanded government role could also undermine current preK options. Unless the rules (for quality of programs, teacher certification, access to funding) are carefully designed, faith-based preK schools could be excluded–e.g., a curriculum or teacher-prep program favored by some religion’s schools (and parents) might not be accepted by the state agency that licenses schools or awards funding.

And no matter what the rules, greater government funding for preK schools undermines those schools that do not want government funds but are now at a competitive disadvantage: many parents will be hard put to choose the private school that has to charge some tuition when another preK school is fully funded by government.

The Council for American Private Education has published a good set of principles “to uphold freedom of choice in early childhood education”:

★ Formal early childhood education should be voluntary.

★ Legislation promoting early childhood education should support the right of parents to choose from a range of programs and providers without financial penalty.

★ Programs designed to assist children and teachers should provide benefits to comparably situated children and teachers, whether in independent or government-run settings.

★ Early childhood education regulations should not seek program uniformity; they should promote pluralism that allows institutions to fulfill their unique missions and parents to choose from a variety of truly distinctive options.