IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Perspective from the Right:: Building a cross-ideological consensus for Child Development Accounts


  • John, David C.


While proposals to create Child Development Accounts (CDA) have some support from all ideological perspectives, that support is most evident among liberal groups and least evident among conservatives. Unfortunately, many conservatives view CDAs as nothing more than a liberal attemp to create yet another new entitlement program at a time when the United States already runs a huge deficit. How to broaden the appeal of CDAs is not really a mystery. Certain asset development efforts have had wide bipartisan support for some time. The bipartisan 2000 KidSave Account proposal shows one way to broaden the appeal of CDAs. Just as it is necessary to be aware of the beliefs and communication style of any group, supporters need to be target their appeals to answer skeptics from both sides. Using jargon or professional terms common to one idiological group may backfire alienating other groups. However, the effort to broaden support should produce a stronger, more popular CDA program that can better meet its goals and survive regardless of who controls the political process.

Suggested Citation

  • John, David C., 2010. "Perspective from the Right:: Building a cross-ideological consensus for Child Development Accounts," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 32(11), pages 1601-1604, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:cysrev:v:32:y:2010:i:11:p:1601-1604

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Green, Richard K. & White, Michelle J., 1997. "Measuring the Benefits of Homeowning: Effects on Children," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 441-461, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item


    Access and download statistics


    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:cysrev:v:32:y:2010:i:11:p:1601-1604. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.