Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

America Keeps Turning Its Back on Childcare; Families are Paying the Price.

Opinion

Preschool children playing with colorful shapes

Childcare providers warn that Trump administration rollbacks and rising costs are pushing America’s fragile child care system toward collapse, leaving families and workers struggling to survive.

Lourdes Balduque / Getty Images

Earlier this month, the Trump Administration sent a clear message to American families: child care is a personal problem, not a public responsibility.

The president’s executive order repealed federally mandated provisions that helped stabilize the child care industry after the COVID-19 shutdown. Without these safety nets, more programs will close their doors. What little federal support childcare providers had was already inadequate. I know this firsthand because, after three decades in the child care field, I was forced to face a harsh reality and close my doors.


As an organizer, I am now fighting in my home state of North Carolina to ensure others don’t do the same. But that fight is getting harder, with higher prices due to tariffs and the war. Now, childcare providers are facing these rollbacks. If America values children, then America must finally value child care and the people who provide it by committing to the public investment required to keep the system from collapsing.

For decades, the U.S. has structured child care as an individual burden carried primarily by women, families, and an underpaid workforce expected to hold together one of the country’s most essential systems through sacrifice alone. As a result, America continues to operate what is essentially 50 fragmented child care experiments layered onto a federally funded system with no consistent national floor for affordability, provider stability, or compensation.

The situation got more dire on Monday with the Trump administration’s executive order. It removed the cap that limited co-payments to 7% of the family’s income; eliminated requirements that direct services be provided through grants and contracts; and rescinded provisions that allowed childcare providers to be paid in advance for their service. In addition, it mandated reimbursement models for programs based on enrollment rather than by attendance. These provisions were enacted as a safety net to offset significant workforce shortages due to chronically low wages.

The same day, across the country, thousands of child care providers and parents protested, sending loud messages to legislators to “fix” the problem. While the needs may differ from state to state, there is one resounding national reality: the system is failing the very people it depends on to survive.

The consequences are impossible to ignore. The rollbacks are driving up costs for childcare providers – and families – at a time when people can least afford it. Rents are rising. Food prices are rising. Utilities are rising. And, for the first time in three years, American wages are not keeping up with inflation.

As an organizer, it rankles me to know that this year marks nearly 106 years since the ratification of the 19th Amendment, yet women still disproportionately carry the labor-intensive and financial burden of care work. The framework of child care has persistently shifted the economic risk of the care economy onto providers themselves. And when I meet with these providers, I hear the same refrains. They are continuously being asked to do more. More training. More documentation. More educational attainment. More compliance. More quality measures. But nowhere in that conversation is there the same urgency around childcare subsidies that help lower-income families afford care, sustainability, or whether the people carrying the system can continue to survive under its weight.

In almost any other industry, experts would recognize this as an unsustainable business model. But child care has historically been cast as “women’s work,” making it easier for society to normalize low wages, unpaid labor, and impossible expectations.

But these changes don’t just affect providers. For families, when quality programs disappear, that lack of access can ripple through every part of their lives. Parents may experience higher absenteeism at work, lost wages, and ultimately even job loss when stable care is no longer available. When families become desperate to keep their jobs to meet basic needs, some may feel forced to place their children in unvetted child care settings, simply because it is the only care they can access or afford.

The welfare of children sits at the center of mandated health and safety requirements, higher education expectations, and increasingly stringent quality systems. Many of these goals are important. But too often, the system appears to be designed to sustain itself rather than to adequately meet the needs of families, providers, and children simultaneously.

What continues to hold this structure together are the caring hearts of providers and the belief that children deserve safe, nurturing environments. But passion cannot continue to subsidize public policy failures.

Childcare providers cannot continue carrying this burden alone. If America truly values children, then legislators must make the public investment to keep the system from collapsing.


Danielle Caldwell is an organizer, early childhood Education Consultant and advocate. She is also a Public Voices Fellow of The OpEd Project in partnership with the National Black Child Development Institute.


Read More

​U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth

U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth testifies during a Senate Committee on Appropriations hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., on July 21, 2026. Hegseth is crafting a strong and masculine identity for his audience as he reportedly contemplates a presidential run.

(Alex Wroblewski/AFP/Getty Images/TNS)

Politicians Can’t Just ’Give the People What They Want’

For reasons that will baffle my many detractors, I am often asked for advice about being an opinion journalist. One of my standard responses is: You have to be willing to disappoint your biggest fans.

What I mean is that if you start to see your job as telling fans what they want to hear, you risk becoming an entertainer rather than a thinker, and eventually you become a caricature. I’ve seen it happen numerous times. Patrick Buchanan was a brilliant columnist and a serious person. But over the course of his career, he listened too much to the people who said, “Go Pat, go!” and too little to friends who said, “I think that’s taking it too far.”

Keep ReadingShow less
White marble exterior of the United States Capitol, often called the Capitol Building, is the home of the United States Congress and the seat of the legislative branch of the U.S. federal government

Congress approval is at a record-low 10%. Moderation and consensus-building, not partisan theatrics, are how Washington gets problems solved.

Richard Sharrocks / Getty Images

Reclaiming the Politics of the Possible

Washington is stuck in a cycle of performative conflict. The incentives seem to reward outrage, not outcomes that last; purity tests, not problem‑solving. So it’s no surprise that after three shutdowns in less than a year, public approval of Congress collapsed to just 10 percent this spring. (Gallup, April 2026.) But the country we live in — where many middle-income families report persistent financial strain and businesses are navigating unprecedented technological upheaval — cannot be governed by theatrics. Breaking this cycle requires moderation, consensus‑building, and a cooperative approach to governance.

This is not a call for centrism as an ideology. Instead, this is a call for transformative leaders to embrace moderation as their governing strategy, recognizing that in a pluralistic country of nearly 350 million people durable solutions require broad and stable alliances. Ultimately, this is a call for the 240 million of us who are eligible to vote in November to elect consensus-builders instead of bomb-throwers, and healers instead of arsonists.

Keep ReadingShow less
Adult man holds a microphone while asking a question during a town hall meeting.

Congress ignored 90% of public support for background checks. Learn how citizen assemblies and sortition helped Ireland break gridlock and could work in the US.

SDI Productions/Getty Images

Consensus Without Power: How Sortition Could Break America's Legislative Gridlock

In April 2013, four months after the Sandy Hook Elementary shooting killed twenty children, the US Senate voted on the Manchin-Toomey Act to expand background checks and to include gun-show and internet sales of firearms. Roughly nine in ten Americans, including a majority of gun owners, supported the bill—a figure that has held steady across more than a decade of polling. It fell short of the 60-vote threshold by six votes. This was not an outlier. On complex issues, representatives often fail to translate public consensus into reality. Research shows that legislators consistently vote in line with donor and interest group preferences over constituent opinion. Before the vote, the National Rifle Association (NRA) warned every senator it would “rate” their vote on its annual rating system, and a low NRA rating could cost senators their next primary. Consequently, the bill died 54-46, and the majority of Americans watched, powerless, as their consensus was overridden by self-interested representatives.

Liberal democracies need a method to bypass electoral incentives that run counter to public opinion. One already exists: Ireland faced the same stalemate on complex issues before it instituted a process called sortition. The beauty of sortition lies in its removal of the primary pressure that misaligns representatives’ interests from public interest: reelection. Much like jury duty, citizens are randomly drawn from the population. An independent body then stratifies the pool, so the final group mirrors the country by age, gender, geography, and income. The group meets over weeks or months, hearing from experts and the public, as well as debating frequently. At the end, it issues a recommendation that parliament may then put to a referendum or pass into law.

Keep ReadingShow less
California’s New Law Aims To Close a Housing Gap for Domestic Violence Survivors
Emily Scherer for The 19th; Getty Images

California’s New Law Aims To Close a Housing Gap for Domestic Violence Survivors

Domestic violence survivors often struggle to find housing, and California’s “Unseen and Unheard Housing Act” will help make more housing available to meet their specific needs.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed the bill Sunday requiring cities and counties to factor in domestic violence survivors when planning for future housing.

Keep ReadingShow less