Posted on 10/14/2021 6:02:13 AM PDT by Kaslin
The relentless pursuit of the American Left to occupy more and more territory in American culture continues.
Tucked away in the Democrat’s massive $3.5 trillion spending nightmare is a $450 billion provision to subsidize child care while also providing free pre-K for every American family. This measure may seem politically popular on its face. But it reveals a bias that, if enacted, will further marginalize families that opt to keep a parent at home rather than enroll in daycare.
To get to the root of it, hear this statement Democrat Representative Bobby Scott (D-VA) made in defense of his party’s plan: “The average family cannot afford child care, and without child care, you cannot go to work.”
He’s completely missing the point. When given the choice, a large portion of American families don’t want both parents to go to work. More than half of married mothers would rather stay home (or have a husband stay home) to care for kids under five years old. When it comes to lower- and working-class families, 58% and 68%, respectively, prefer to have one parent stay home during their kids’ early childhood years, while the other goes to work. It’s mostly upper-class Americans—the ones who would least need government childcare subsidies—who actually prefer to hire childcare providers so both parents can work full-time.
The innumerable factors that play into childcare decisions look different for every family. Many moms and dads make a simple calculation that they can provide better care for their child than someone else. Others conclude that out-of-home care is the best solution.
No matter where families fall on this, one thing is clear: The government should not be nudging families in one direction or the other—especially when studies show that infants and toddlers who spend a lot of time in daycare face challenges that their peers who are raised at home don’t. Families who opt to keep a parent at home are often able to shepherd their children in ways that yield better grades in school and less stress for children.
For these reasons and more, many Americans make immense sacrifices so that one parent can stay home with the kids. Maybe dad takes on extra hours at work. Or mom doesn’t take a desirable job because she values time at home over time at work. Or the family chooses a smaller house over their dream home to free up more wiggle room in their budget.
Yet it’s these families who the Democrats’ childcare takeover leaves behind. Laws are never morally neutral. A law always says something about the values of the people who made it. Passing this legislation pushes families toward non-parental child care while failing spectacularly to acknowledge the real sacrifice made by families who decide to keep their children home.
It’s another classic example of government bureaucrats butting in where they don’t belong and saying they know what’s best when they really don’t. Every parent has a different financial setup. Every kid has unique learning, emotional, and physical needs. No family is exactly like another. Yet Democrats are presumptuously suggesting that out-of-home childcare is the right choice for every American family.
And what’s worse, they want to provide child care for “free,” even though, first of all, taxpayers would ultimately bear the cost. And second of all, the government hasn’t given us any good reason to trust it with our kids’ early education. We’ve all seen America’s government-funded public schools ramp up efforts to indoctrinate K-12 students with anti-American, discriminatory propaganda (ie. critical race theory). The Democrats haven’t laid out specific plans for their new child care system yet. But when the government dishes out money, it always comes with strings attached. One can only guess which radical, politically biased strings they’d attach to preschool curriculum.
Worse still, this influx of federal funding—and the regulations that would undoubtedly come with it—would force a dilemma on religious childcare centers. If they take the government subsidies, they’ll also have to accept the liberal canon and water down their values. If they don’t take the subsidies, then the heavily subsidized secular daycare centers will undercut them in pricing and force them out of business.
In the best case scenario, Democrats would keep their paws off our toddlers’ education. But if D.C. politicians insist on giving their two cents (or $450 billion, in this case) toward child care and pre-K, they should at least do it in a way that doesn’t actively discriminate against parents who have chosen to keep one parent at home to guide their children through their earliest years.
Washington doesn’t know best. The American people do. It’s time for the Democrats to stop pushing their one-size-fits-all solutions—especially one that a majority of Americans agree isn’t the solution for their families at all.
The goal is to completely break up families. Discourage marriage and encourage homosexual relationships and trans B.S.
They have done a great job so far. Our side? Not so much.
its not free. You’re stealing money from wage earners to pay for everyone. Its called communism.
It’s just a form of welfare. You pay the lady down the street to watch your kids with free government money and she pays you to watch her kids with the same.
The decision to stay home pays dividends that go far beyond mere economics.
They hate the family because it is a focus of loyalty not subordinate to the state.
“providing free pre-K for every American family
Great idea. Will be able to reprogram them little tykes to depend on the government for everything.
I’m sure my bold, proactive, staunchly pro-family Republican leaders in Congress are all over this already.
(sarcasm)
The Democrats will be pushing LGBQT families hard the next few years because communist Mayor Pete is their only hope for 2024.They have nothing.
its not free. You’re stealing money from wage earners to pay for everyone. Its called communism
But if more parents enter the workforce there will be more wage earners to tax! C'mon man, don't you see that it pays for itself? /s
“The decision to stay home pays dividends that go far beyond mere economics.”
Too true!
“The goal is to completely break up families. Discourage marriage and encourage homosexual relationships and trans B.S.”
And ALL that is straight out of hell....and I mean that LITERALLY.
“Tucked away in the Democrat’s massive $3.5 trillion spending nightmare is a $450 billion provision to subsidize child care while also providing free pre-K for every American family.”
Also tucked away is the requirement for any pre K provider to have a college degree.
Head Start doesn’t work. Look at the parent who has a day off. Will they keep their kids at home for that one day or ‘run errands’? Give a parent(or anyone) the chance to be lazy and guess what they’ll choose?
This sort of explains it, but not really.
Because it still leaves you wondering *why* they want the destruction of the traditional family?
I think it's because we're dealing with a collection of very sick people, who hate traditional values, who hate white men and their dominant role in history, and who hate Christianity. These are people who have always felt marginalized and threatened by the majority, and are doing everything they can to destroy the foundation of it all - the family.
Cafe standards, declaring that 50% of all cars sold will be electric by 2030, deciding how much water a toilet uses per flush, what oil you can cook french-fries in, deciding what light bulb a consumer may buy...
The idea of a free market and “consumers” defining the market by their purchases is gone.
Today technocrats and politicians shape the market by regulating the shit out of it, to the point of defining pizza as a vegetable. That way some economic special interest still gets the benefit from the sale of their product in school lunch programs paid for by the government which >70% of all children in school participate in.
America today is just a “shade” better than the command driven socialist former East block. And there is also a reason why we have empty shelves today, just like in the former East block.
The big thing in all this is that pre-school has no benefit as to future schooling. It’s become nothing more than a free baby sitting program. They should make it conditional upon working. Hire your own baby sitter so you can go shopping or visiting or lay in bed all day.
https://www.havemann-gesellschaft.de/fileadmin/robert-havemann-gesellschaft/aktuelles/MAUERECHO/1990_06/0628_leere_Regale/Ausverkauf_DDR_37.png (Former East Germany)
https://nypost.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2021/10/freight-310.jpg?quality=90&strip=all (USA, 2021)
We need to subsidize childcare to get woman in the work force because one salary is not enough to meet the cost of living and two salaries are not enough to pay for childcare because high taxes are needed to pay for social programs.
I would say that the cost of living has escalated over the decades as a RESULT of the increase in 2 income families.
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.
