Posted on 01/22/2015 12:18:52 PM PST by jazusamo
President Obama on Thursday detailed a new $80 billion proposal intended to help more families afford child care as part of a post-State of the Union policy push the White House hopes can win over Republicans and independents.
The president called for the federal government to dramatically expand the Child Care and Development Fund, a federal program that provides states grants for childcare assistance programs to help low- and middle-income families.
"In today's economy, when having both parents in the workforce is an economic necessity for many families, affordable, high-quality child care and early childhood education — these aren't just nice to have, this is a must-have," Obama said in remarks at the University of Kansas.
The White House says more money is necessary because budgetary restraints mean only a fraction of children who qualify for assistance receive it. Subsidies provided to those who qualify often don't do enough to cover child care costs.
The proposal to expand the development fund comes on top of the president's proposal to triple the maximum child care tax credit available to middle-class families. Under Obama's plan, parents could receive up to a $3,000 credit.
And the White House wants to create a new program to help young families who have trouble finding suitable child care programs because they work uncommon hours or live in rural areas.
"Expanding access in the early childhood space is tremendously important," domestic policy adviser Cecelia Muñoz said Thursday.
In his speech in Kansas, Obama pitched the proposal as something that could cut across partisan lines. The White House has said Obama's post-State of the Union swing through two red states — Idaho and Kansas — was a deliberate attempt to reach voters across the aisle.
"Republican families feel it just as much as Democratic families," Obama said. "There's no distinction. I don't want any family to face the choice between not working or leaving their children in unsafe or poor-quality child care."
An aide to Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) dismissed Obama's proposal and noted the president also wanted to reduce tax breaks on savings plans that allow parents to invest money set aside for their children's college educations.
“Republicans are all for increasing access to quality, affordable education, but we don’t need more top-down policies from Washington or new tax hikes on middle-income families saving for their children’s college education," Boehner aide Cory Fritz said in a statement.
Obama said the child care issue was personal for him, and that he and the first lady struggled to figure out how to pay both child care costs and student loans.
"I don't want anybody being day care poor," he said.
Before speaking at the school, Obama visited a community center where preschool was funded through the federal Head Start program.
"The light in all of these children's eyes, you know, that the sense of possibility and potential for these kids made me just that much more determined to keep strengthening and keep promoting and expanding early childhood education, to give all of our children a strong start," Obama said.
And just think, you can force all those new child care workers into the unions, so you can take the money the government is paying them and give it back to the politicians...
If they just lowered taxes and regulation maybe more people could have a parent stay at home with the children and raise them themselves.
YEP...this penalizes stay at home parenting...
What would the tally be if we went back to the recent past - say 30 years - and added up the amount of government money targeted to help “low and middle income families”?
I’m betting it’s in the trillions.
How many of those moms ask their children...."Who's your daddy"?
At least 4 years ago some BS study was published saying kids were better off in daycare than at home because they learned more. Utter crap - but I started saying then that they were after the babies.
And we’ve only had more of this push to get toddlers into institutionalized care. You KNOW the dollars will only go to Fed approved programs, right?
Look for more homeschool persecution and pushes to remove babes from their mother’s arms.
Really!?
NOT
All the losers who can afford tattoos and manicures but NOT babysitters, can NOW continue their life long party at taxpayers' expense while they go on having children out of wedlock and dumping them on the system!
Sure-Let’s REWARD this BS behavior!!
This President has no concept of self reliance and therefore loves to spend through every piece of credit he can get his hands on.
You can bet it will only be for peeps on Welfare and receiving obamacare!
Yep, now many of the moms on welfare can afford daycare while they sit at home watching the tube or whatever.
Lower taxes and regulations. Hmmph. That is subversive.
Most of the people this is geared towards probably don't pay federal income taxes to begin with.
80 BILLION ?
Run the numbers.
In 2012, 73.9 million Americans - about 1 in 4 - were under age 18.
Jim for C. Town knocked the ball Mickey Mantle style out of the park. If they didn;t take so much of our money, more ONE PARENTS could stay home and lovingly take care of their own kids, without the Unions. Dah.
Obama is causing more cases where both husband and wife work through part-timing used by employers to get around obamacare mandates and costs. He causes it and then wants you to pay to give someone a tax break because 2 people work. There should be an incentive for wives to stay and raise the family. As usual dems want to mess up the traditional family.
Just more of the same, expansion of the welfare state is all he knows.
Mexican children ?
Last week Obama inched out the upper boundary with "free" college credits, this week we'll work the lower boundary with more gov't child care.
We'll all be living the life of Julia someday.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.