Democrats’ Toddler Takeover Would Be A Disaster For American Families

Though Democrats Assert That Their Scheme Would ‘Make It Cheaper For Parents To Raise Their Kids’ …

SENATE MAJORITY LEADER CHUCK SCHUMER (D-NY): “Here’s something just about every American can appreciate: Build Back Better will help make it cheaper for parents to raise their kids. For that alone, it is more than worth the effort.” (Sen. Schumer, Remarks, 12/07/2021)

… Senate Republicans Understand ‘It Punishes Providers And Enforces A One-Size-Fits-All, Top-Down Policy From The Federal Government On Our Families Nationwide’ And ‘There’s No Way That This Government Will Provide Families With Enough Subsidies To Make Up For The Cost That The “Build Back Broker” Plan Is Actually Going To Increase’

SEN. RICHARD BURR (R-NC), Senate HELP Committee Ranking Member: “This bill, as currently written, is designed … to take faith-based organizations out of the child care business, it’s designed to minimize the number of child care options in every state – rural or urban – and it is designed to…take zero to two [year olds] and put them in Head Start and take three to four [year olds] and put them in the public school system. So, at some point the design is that the private sector, as it relates to [child] care, is totally gone, whether its faith-based or family driven.” (U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, & Pensions Ranking Member, Press Release, 12/01/2021)

SEN. TIM SCOTT (R-SC): “In so many cases, for the parents of the 12 million kids [under age] five, it’s really a ‘Build Back Broker’ plan, honestly. If you literally think about what [the Democrats’] own folks are saying about their plan, it’s devastating to families. I think about the liberal People’s Policy Project that calculates that this plan would increase the cost of having a single child – one child – in daycare from $15,800 to over $28,000. There’s no way that this government will provide families with enough subsidies to make up for the cost that the ‘Build Back Broker’ plan is actually going to increase. I can’t think of anything less logical, anything less commonsense, than this plan as it relates to child care.” (U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, & Pensions Ranking Member, Press Release, 12/01/2021)

SEN. SUSAN COLLINS (R-ME): “Republicans and Democrats agree that quality, affordable child care is instrumental to a child’s educational success and health, and the ability of parents to participate in the workforce, but replacing the current system with fewer options would make child care less accessible and less affordable for working parents throughout this country. The ongoing public health and economic crisis has underscored the fact that what parents need is more options, not fewer options.” (U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, & Pensions Ranking Member, Press Release, 12/01/2021)

SEN. JONI ERNST (R-IA): “[Child care] is very personal to me. Going back to when I was a young woman in rural Iowa trying to find child care for my own daughter…And, I know that so many of our rural communities struggle through those same situations…But, what we see with the Democrats and their reckless tax and spend bill: It is not the right option. It’s the wrong bill at the wrong time. It fundamentally falls short of delivering expanded choice and affordability for our American families. And, it punishes providers and enforces a one-size-fits-all, top-down policy from the federal government on our families nationwide.” (U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, & Pensions Ranking Member, Press Release, 12/01/2021)

SEN. MITT ROMNEY (R-UT): “Do I really want to have the federal government get into telling people where they have to send their kids, what child care they can have, what’s going to get taught there? What are the values we want to give them? Do we want…the federal government – not families, not states and localities, not churches – do we want the federal government stepping in and saying ‘here’s what we want you to teach?’ And that, in my opinion, is a fraught course to go down.” (U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, & Pensions Ranking Member, Press Release, 12/01/2021)

Analysts From Both Sides Of The Ideological Aisle Agree Democrats’ Proposal Would Drive Up The Costs For Child Care

LEADER McCONNELL: “The Democrats have written their toddler takeover in ways that would turn families’ finances upside-down and make already-expensive childcare even costlier…. First, their reckless taxing and spending spree would make childcare dramatically more expensive through an avalanche of new mandates, regulations, and micromanagement. The usual Washington D.C. routine. State and local governments are panicking about the childcare inflation this would cause. Here in D.C., as one liberal analyst uncovered, local officials have formally estimated that the per-child daycare cost for a toddler or an infant would jump by about $12,000 per year. Twelve thousand dollars more per child per year! President Biden’s inflation is coming for daycare. That’s why the other half of their clumsy scheme is to dump subsidies onto some families. They want to borrow and print even more so they can throw money at the thing they will have just made more expensive!” (Sen. McConnell, Remarks, 12/07/2021)

‘Most Families … Will Pay More For Child Care’

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL EDITORIAL BOARD: “Democrats will claim that their new bill at least encourages work by making child care free, but that refers only to a narrow slice of the population. Most families, especially those that don’t qualify for a full subsidy or that have older children, will pay more for child care. One reason: Under the heading of ‘quality regulation,’ the bill requires that child-care workers be paid a ‘living wage’ and that their earnings be ‘equivalent to wages for elementary educators with similar credentials and experience.’” (Editorial, “The Spending Bill Is an Attack on Work and Marriage,” The Wall Street Journal, 10/31/2021)

AMERICAN ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE’S MICHAEL R. STRAIN: “As demand for commercial child care increased, the cost would go up as well. And increasing the cost of employing workers by stipulating that they receive higher pay would boost prices even further. When government subsidizes the demand for something, more people want to buy it, leading to higher prices. That’s what happened in higher education and health care. The rising costs intensify calls for even more generous subsidies, which in turn boost prices even further. Congress should not want to make the same mistake with child care.” (Michael R. Strain, “Biden’s Childcare Plan Might Only Raise Parents’ Costs,” Bloomberg Opinion, 8/16/2021)

Even The Left-Wing Founder Of The People’s Policy Project, A Think Tank ‘With A Special Focus On Socialist And Social Democratic Economic Ideas,’ Says Democrats’ Plan To Subsidize Child Care ‘Will Drive Up Costs’

“People’s Policy Project (3P) is a think tank founded in 2017…. The work of 3P aims to fill the holes left by the current think tank landscape with a special focus on socialist and social democratic economic ideas…. Matt Bruenig is currently the president of 3P. Bruenig previously worked as a lawyer at the National Labor Relations Board and as a policy analyst at the Demos Think Tank.” (“About,” People’s Policy Project Website, Accessed 12/07/2021)

PEOPLE’S POLICY PROJECT FOUNDER MATT BRUENIG: “The Democratic child-care proposal now working its way through Congress … will drive up costs for many middle-class families while providing no benefit at all to the poorest and most vulnerable children. If lawmakers do not fix these design problems, they could wreak havoc on many of the families they are trying to help.” (Matt Bruenig, “How the Democratic Child-Care Proposal Hurts Families,” The Atlantic, 11/19/2021)

• “Under the child-care plan, the federal government will provide money to states so that they can improve the quality of child-care services, increase the pay of child-care workers, and subsidize the price of child care for families who use those services. In the first year, only families with incomes below their state’s median will be eligible. In the second, third, and subsequent years, the eligibility cutoff is respectively set at 125 percent, 150 percent, and 250 percent of each state’s median income. In 2028 the program expires—a gimmick to keep down the 10-year cost. Such hard eligibility cutoffs, sometimes called benefit cliffs, mean that earning a single dollar beyond the limit could cost families tens of thousands of dollars in subsidies. Some two-income families may find that they are better off if one parent leaves the workforce—not to take care of the kids during the day, but to afford to have someone else watch them.” (Matt Bruenig, “How the Democratic Child-Care Proposal Hurts Families,” The Atlantic, 11/19/2021)

• “Parents with incomes above the cutoff will face another challenge: higher prices for the same care they currently receive…. The legislation under consideration mandates that participating child-care centers pay workers the same as elementary-school teachers with similar credentials and experience. The legislation would also dramatically increase demand for child-care services as newly subsidized users pour into the sector. This would force wages upward even in the absence of an explicit wage mandate, because child-care centers would have to increase pay to attract new workers.” (Matt Bruenig, “How the Democratic Child-Care Proposal Hurts Families,” The Atlantic, 11/19/2021)

It’s Not Just Policy Analysts: The District Of Columbia Government Studied A Similar Proposal And Concluded The Cost Of Infant And Toddler Care Would Nearly Double, Yet ‘Almost Certainly Understate[s] How Much Costs Would Rise’

BRUENIG: “When analyzing a nearly identical child-care proposal for the District of Columbia, the city’s Office of the State Superintendent of Education concluded that hiking wages to elementary-school-teacher levels would increase the annual unsubsidized cost of infant and toddler care by $6,335 to $12,175, depending on the quality and location of the care being provided. These numbers almost certainly understate how much costs would rise, because, as the report’s authors point out, they do not include any of the wage increases that would likely be required for administrators and other staff not directly involved in care. In areas where the pay gap between child-care workers and elementary-school teachers is greater than it is in D.C., wages and prices would rise by an even higher amount.” (Matt Bruenig, “How the Democratic Child-Care Proposal Hurts Families,” The Atlantic, 11/19/2021)

Democrats Would Then Pile Onerous Regulations On Child Care Providers That Would Discriminate Against And Potentially Drive Out Faith-Based Organizations, Which A Significant Number Of Families Rely On

BIPARTISAN POLICY CENTER: “Faith-based organizations—encompassing both religious ministry and religious-oriented community groups—play an important role in American society, including in the delivery of child care…. Faith-based child care programs that represent and instill the values parents are seeking for their children can drive portions of the child care market. At the same time, faith-based child care can offer settings and curriculums that support children’s healthy development and successful learning. As the effects of the pandemic continue to impact the nation’s child care market, inclusivity of all parent child care preferences will be especially critical to supporting a comprehensive child care system in this country.” (“Examining the Role of Faith-Based Child Care,” Bipartisan Policy Center, 5/2021)

• “In a national poll conducted by Bipartisan Policy Center in December 2020, we found that 31% of working-parent households used center-based care, and over half, or 53%, of these families used one that was affiliated with a faith organization. Parents additionally cited trust as the leading factor for why they selected their child care program.” (“Examining the Role of Faith-Based Child Care,” Bipartisan Policy Center, 5/2021)

LEADER McCONNELL: “For parents who do use childcare outside the home, faith-based options are incredibly popular. The Bipartisan Policy Center estimates that 53% of parents who use center-based care use ones that are linked to a faith-based organization. But the same Democrats who are letting far-left propaganda trickle down from the universities into K-12 schools are now declaring war on faith-based childcare. Washington Democrats want to unleash the woke mob on church daycare. There are at least two parts of their bill that are direct attacks. First, liberals are trying to chase faith-based providers out of the childcare industry by denying funds to any facility they deem discriminatory. Of course, today’s radical left tosses around those kinds of accusations at any remotely traditional institution. Faith-based childcare centers could potentially get their subsidies ripped away if they don’t hire who secular bureaucrats want them to hire, set up their facilities the way secular bureaucrats want them set up, or even — listen to this — gave preference to kids of their own faith! … It’s a joke. The left is trying to weaponize the word ‘discrimination’ to push faith-based childcare out of business. Another part of their bill goes out of its way to deny money for facilities upgrades to buildings that are used for ‘sectarian instruction or religious worship.’ If a faith-based center leads kids in prayer or teaches them their families’ faiths, they don’t get the funding that everyone else gets. We see this act over and over from the culture warriors. They pretend they’re happy to have religious groups in the public square… but only if they check all their beliefs at the door. A few years ago, the Supreme Court had to strike down a similar policy that penalized faith-based organizations. A state had tried to deny a church a widely-available grant to fix up its playground. The Court struck down the law 7 to 2.” (Sen. McConnell, Remarks, 12/07/2021)

Democrats’ Bill Would Make ‘A Major Change,’ Requiring Faith-Based Organizations ‘To Either Comply With Nondiscrimination Laws Or Turn Away Families’

“A coalition of conservative religious groups is waging an intensive lobbying effort to remove a nondiscrimination provision from President Biden’s ambitious prekindergarten and child care plans, fearing it would disqualify their programs from receiving a huge new infusion of federal money. … The provision at issue is a standard one in many federal laws, which would mandate that all providers comply with federal nondiscrimination statutes. Religious organizations, whose child care programs are currently exempt from some such laws, argue that it would effectively block many of their providers from participating …” (“Biden’s Child Care Plan Faces Resistance From Religious Groups,” The New York Times, 11/14/2021)

• “At issue is what’s arguably a major change the bill would make in how the federal government treats institutions that receive aid for the care of small children. For decades, low-income families have received funds from the Child Care and Development Block Grant program that they may use at a variety of child care centers. But since those centers are not necessarily considered direct recipients of federal funds, they are not always bound by nondiscrimination laws. A similar situation exists for religious elementary schools that receive money through local school systems to educate low-income students. [Rep. Robert Scott’s (D-VA)] legislation would categorize any prekindergarten or child care center that participates in the new program as a federal financial recipient, requiring it to either comply with nondiscrimination laws or turn away families, the conservative religious organizations argue.” (“Biden’s Child Care Plan Faces Resistance From Religious Groups,” The New York Times, 11/14/2021)

• “The bill would also prohibit any child care provider from using the funds to perform work on ‘buildings or facilities that are used primarily for sectarian instruction or religious worship.’” (“Biden’s Child Care Plan Faces Resistance From Religious Groups,” The New York Times, 11/14/2021)

‘The Organizations Argue That The Rules Would Force Them To Choose Between Participating In The Child Care Initiative And Continuing To Teach Religious Content’: ‘They Have To Enter A Faustian Bargain [Where] They Agree To Basically Give Up Their Faith’

“Some of the faith groups are pressing lawmakers to scrap or modify the nondiscrimination language, asserting that it would essentially shut them out of the new federal program unless they made major changes to the way they operate. For instance, it could bar federal funds from going to programs that refused to hire a gay employee, gave preference to applicants of their faith or failed to renovate their facilities to accommodate disabled students.” (“Biden’s Child Care Plan Faces Resistance From Religious Groups,” The New York Times, 11/14/2021)

• “The organizations argue that the rules would force them to choose between participating in the child care initiative and continuing to teach religious content, convene all-boys or all-girls programs, or give preferences in hiring or admissions to people of their religion. Congressional staff members working on the bill do not believe it prohibits religious organizations from teaching religious content. The groups — including the American leaders of the Catholic Church and one of the country’s largest Orthodox Jewish groups — contend that unless the bill is rewritten, they will be forced to turn away families that want to use benefits from the bill to send children to their centers.” (“Biden’s Child Care Plan Faces Resistance From Religious Groups,” The New York Times, 11/14/2021)

• JENNIFER DANIELS, Associate Director for Public Policy at the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops: “It will be detrimental to our ability to participate…. It would impact our ability to stick with our Catholic mission in a variety of ways. We’ve worked really hard to make our concerns known.” (“Biden’s Child Care Plan Faces Resistance From Religious Groups,” The New York Times, 11/14/2021)

• NATHAN J. DIAMENT, Public Policy Director at the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America: “Right now, the way the bill text is drafted, there are details that will deter, if not make it impossible for, faith-based providers to participate.” (“Biden’s Child Care Plan Faces Resistance From Religious Groups,” The New York Times, 11/14/2021)

LETTER FROM FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS: “We are writing to express our urgent concerns regarding the child care and universal pre-kindergarten provisions in the House-passed Build Back Better Act (BBBA). We represent religious denominations, schools, and charities that comprise and serve millions of Americans…. [T]he current child care and universal pre-kindergarten (UPK) provisions in the Build Back Better Act will suppress, if not exclude, the participation of many faith-based providers; and faith-based providers are what more than half of American families choose for child care. While language in the BBBA does not preclude parents from selecting sectarian providers, the subsequent provisions in the bill text make it virtually impossible for many religious providers to participate.” (Faith Coalition, Letter to Sens. Murray and Burr, 12/01/2021)

• “First, the text defines all providers as recipients of federal financial assistance, whether the funds come via certificates (in the child care program) or direct grants (in the pre-kindergarten program). Making faith-based providers of child-care and pre-kindergarten into recipients of federal financial assistance triggers federal compliance obligations and non-discrimination provisions. This is an explicit departure from current policy governing the federal Child Care and Development Block Grant (CCDBG), in which faith-based providers participate with religious liberty protections intact, and in which providers are explicitly not recipients of federal financial assistance. CCDBG was designed with bipartisan support with this important protection in place in order to ensure the participation of religious providers in its system and protect their ability to have religious content in their programs and other key elements of their religious character.” (Faith Coalition, Letter to Sens. Murray and Burr, 12/01/2021)

• “Second, in addition to the problematic federal financial assistance provisions, the BBBA applies nondiscrimination requirements to both the child care and universal pre-kindergarten sections that do not generally attach to FFA. Most notably, the BBBA applies Head Start’s non-discrimination provisions to the entire child care and UPK programs regardless of whether a provider is a Head Start provider. Head Start’s nondiscrimination provisions prohibit discrimination on the basis of sex, creed, and belief, among other things. In this sense, it is redundant to the prohibition on religious discrimination in employment under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and to the prohibition on sex discrimination under Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972. However, more fundamentally, both Title VII and Title IX contain carefully crafted exemptions for religious organizations, and Head Start has no exemption. Therefore, application of the Head Start nondiscrimination provisions to faith-based providers could, for instance, interfere with faith-based providers’ protected rights under Title VII and Title IX regarding curricula or teaching, sex-specific programs (such as separate boys or girls schools or classes), and preferences for employing individuals who share the providers’ religious beliefs. The Head Start nondiscrimination provisions’ implementing regulations also contain requirements that would pose operational difficulties for many faith-based schools and child care providers. These problems will not be limited to federally funded UPK programs established under the BBBA. The BBBA requires states with existing state-level UPK programs to fold their programs into BBBA’s UPK program, on the condition that the state programs meet the BBBA’s terms. This threatens to remove faith-based providers from successful, existing state programs that are more protective of faith-based providers’ autonomy than the BBBA.” (Faith Coalition, Letter to Sens. Murray and Burr, 12/01/2021)

Letter signed by:
Agudath Israel of America
American Association of Christian Schools
AND Campaign
Association of Christian Schools International
Association of Christian Teachers and Schools
Catholic Charities USA
Christian Schools International
CCCU - Council of Christian Colleges & Universities
Council of Islamic Schools in North America
Evangelical Lutheran Education Association
Institutional Religious Freedom Alliance
Lutheran Center for Religious Liberty
The Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod
National Association of Evangelicals
National Catholic Educational Association
Southern Baptist Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission
Seventh-day Adventist Church - North American Division
Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America
U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops Committee for Religious Liberty
U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops Committee on Catholic Education
Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod Schools

• CARROLL: “It’s very important that we have a set of pluralistic options that are religious, not religious so that parents also can make the decision. … We have to decide who is going to raise the children and what values are impart[ed] to the children. That’s a very intimate decision for a parent to make and what this bill is doing is taking a whole array of options right off the table. … It also puts religious institutions, think of what happened with The Little Sisters of the Poor, for example, in the context of Obamacare, but it’s putting religious institutions in a position in which, if they want to get to the money, or to accept money that goes to parents, they have to enter a Faustian Bargain which they agree to basically give up their faith.” (Senate Republican Roundtable with Child Care Providers, 12/01/2021)

Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) Also Raised Concerns About The Bill’s Discrimination Against Faith-Based Organizations

“[Sen. Joe] Manchin [D-WV] raised the issue at a recent closed-door meeting with Senate Democrats, emphasizing that the church and other faith-based organizations play a crucial role in helping care for many families in West Virginia, according to a person familiar with his comments. Mr. Manchin argued that a little bit of funding would go a long way in helping religiously affiliated institutions provide a quality education for pre-K children, the person said, and he insisted they be eligible for any funds that are available.” (“Biden’s Child Care Plan Faces Resistance From Religious Groups,” The New York Times, 11/14/2021)

Democrats’ Child Care Plans Also Privilege Some Family Arrangements Over Others: ‘They Are Steamrolling Over Family Fairness, Over Families’ Choices And Options, Over The Diversity Of American Families And Their Aspirations’

LEADER McCONNELL: “Speaker Pelosi suggested [recently] that she approves of one kind of family structure — ‘parents earning and children learning.’ She said Democrats want government programs to ‘liberat[e]’ families so that both parents work full-time. Well, lots of families like that model, Mr. President. But other families prefer other models. Not everybody defines ‘liberation’ the same way. Yet Washington Democrats want Big Government to bless certain family arrangements and not others. Has your family made a different set of sacrifices so a father or mother can parent full-time? Sorry, Democrats want to redistribute money away from your family to other households that may earn more money. Has your family built its whole life around a plan for a grandparent to provide in-home care? Too bad — Grandma or Grandpa might have to fill out paperwork and apply for the bureaucrats’ blessing, or that family could be denied help also. Democrats could easily end up taxing working-class families with a full-time parent in order to subsidize the arrangements of wealthier two-income households. They are steamrolling over family fairness, over families’ choices and options, over the diversity of American families and their aspirations.” (Sen. McConnell, Remarks, 11/02/2021)

MANHATTAN INSTITUTE’S ROBERT VERBRUGGEN: “[H]uge child-care subsidies and universal pre-K share a significant feature … they exclude couples where one parent works while the other watches the kids. Economically, such subsidies discourage parents from staying home with their children to begin with … To the extent the government picks up the daycare tab for working parents, stay-at-home parents pass up those subsidies rather than actually benefiting financially from the work they do…. Make no mistake: this is the government putting its finger on the scale, fundamentally altering the tradeoffs associated with the decision to stay home, even as many parents say in surveys that they want to stay home or to work only part-time. Many of the policies’ advocates essentially admit this, though they couch it in friendlier terms …” (Robert VerBruggen, “Family (Policy) Drama,” City Journal, 10/19/2021)

Just Like The Rest Of Democrats’ Reckless Taxing-And-Spending Spree, Their Child Care Plan Hides Massive Federal Costs Behind Budget Gimmicks

AMERICAN ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE’S ANGELA RACHIDI: “The House of Representatives passed their Build Back Better (BBB) plan [in November], which includes a new childcare entitlement program…. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates the program will cost $273.5 billion over the ten-year period ending 2031. However, well-known budget gimmicks and cost-sharing provisions mask the total costs in a few ways. As my AEI colleague Matt Weidinger recently pointed out, Democrats used ‘10 years of tax hikes to cover the cost of often just a few initial years of new benefits.’ The new childcare program is a perfect example of this questionable strategy. The BBB plan only authorizes the new childcare program through 2027 even though new taxes and expected revenues extend through 2031. The CBO estimated that the childcare program would cost the federal government $58.8 billion in 2027 when fully implemented; suggesting the actual ten-year cost of the childcare program would be over $500 billion if funded completely. If Congress extends the program beyond 2027, as many progressives believe it will, the additional costs will require either tax hikes or greater deficit spending.” (Angela Rachidi, “New Build Back Better Childcare Entitlement Will Be Costly For States,” American Enterprise Institute, 11/23/2021)

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL EDITORIAL BOARD: “The pre-K and child care entitlements are estimated to cost only $380 billion because they phase in gradually and expire after six years. But there’s zero chance they will expire in 2027. Once the middle-class gets hooked, the entitlements will be impossible to repeal. CRFB estimates the two programs would cost $800 billion if made permanent.” (Editorial, “The Real Biden Bill: At Least $4.6 Trillion,” The Wall Street Journal, 11/18/2021)

And It Piles Costly Unfunded Mandates Onto States, Making The Program Unappealing To Governors Who Want To Avoid Spiraling Expenses

LEADER McCONNELL: “But here’s where a bad idea turns into a terrible one. The Democrats wouldn’t help families directly. This isn’t some simple voucher that families can use as they please. My colleagues have produced an insanely tangled scheme where the truckloads of money go from Washington… to state governments… to the childcare centers. One leaky bucket after another. The problems run even deeper than that. Democrats want states to sign up for badly underfunded mandates. That’s the effect, because the entitlement programs will surely last forever, but for accounting purposes, Democrats are pretending the money stops after a decade. Many states will not be keen to be socialist guinea pigs.” (Sen. McConnell, Remarks, 12/07/2021)

AMERICAN ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE’S ANGELA RACHIDI: “Another way the House hides the full cost is by requiring states to contribute. The bill specifies that states must pay 5 percent of the new childcare benefit costs (they must also cover a share of administrative and other expenses). This may not seem like a large amount, but assuming the annual cost of the program will be about $60 billion, states will need to come up with an additional $3 billion per year to cover their share. For context, from 2016–2019, states spent $1.2 billion annually in matching funds to administer the current federal childcare subsidy program — also known as the Child Care Development Block Grant (CCDBG) or the Child Care Development Fund (CCDF). Since the BBB plan does not phase out CCDBG, it appears that the new program’s match requirements will stack on top of, rather than replace, current state obligated spending on childcare, resulting in a two- to three-fold increase in state spending on childcare. This before new state funding requirements to operate the universal pre-K program also included in the BBB plan.” (Angela Rachidi, “New Build Back Better Childcare Entitlement Will Be Costly For States,” American Enterprise Institute, 11/23/2021)

• “[T]he federal government is using budgeting gimmicks to create a massive new federal program, leaving states shadowed by uncertainty about its future and raising questions about the long-term financial sustainability of the program…. These questions about what happens after 2027 should make state officials nervous. The legislation requires that states develop a childcare program that offers higher wages to childcare workers and implements stricter childcare regulations, which will likely drive smaller (and lower-cost) childcare providers out of business. If states implement the childcare program as planned, the costs of childcare will likely skyrocket in response to new requirements and regulations, prompting a greater need for government assistance. If Congress extends the program beyond 2027, states will need to identify new revenues to cover matching funds for an ever-increasing program, while facing no guarantee that Congress will fund the program at the same level for the long-term. Alternatively, if Congress allows the program to end in 2027 as it currently stands in the legislation, it will put states in a difficult position: find billions of new state dollars to continue funding the childcare program beyond 2027 or let working families cover the new higher costs of childcare. None of these options seems desirable.” (Angela Rachidi, “New Build Back Better Childcare Entitlement Will Be Costly For States,” American Enterprise Institute, 11/23/2021)

ELLEN REYNOLDS, CEO of Georgia Child Care Association: “It’s not a true entitlement program because it’s only extended to 2027-28 and so we will have a cliff then that [Congress will] have to face in federal funding, which we can’t prognosticate where we are going to be at that time financially, as well as state governments. So, you are asking them to invest in something that will also have a cliff effect that they may have to retract back if federal funding is not continued or if they don’t have the state funds to continue the program.” (Senate Republican Roundtable with Child Care Providers, 12/01/2021)

PEOPLE’S POLICY PROJECT FOUNDER MATT BRUENIG: “[I]t allows state governments to choose whether or not to participate. When the Obama administration expanded Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act in 2010, 24 states chose not to participate, and even today, 12 states continue as holdouts. More recently, when pandemic unemployment benefits were extended this year, 26 states chose not to participate. This child-care legislation will likely spur the same result. Republican governors, who are already disposed to reject social-spending increases … will point to the middle-class price hikes, the asymmetrical treatment of stay-at-home parents, the asymmetrical treatment of church-based child-care providers, and the temporary nature of the program as reasons for not participating.” (Matt Bruenig, “How the Democratic Child-Care Proposal Hurts Families,” The Atlantic, 11/19/2021)