Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

​Major step toward resolving national child-care crisis

​Major step toward resolving national child-care crisis
Getty Images

Anderson edited "Leveraging: A Political, Economic and Societal Framework" (Springer, 2014), has taught at five universities and ran for the Democratic nomination for a Maryland congressional seat in 2016.

We have had a national child-care crisis for many years, some would say decades. During the worst of the pandemic years the American Rescue Plan provided an increase in the Child Tax Credit (which can be used for child-care) from $2,000 up to $3,600 for most families with children under age five and from $2,000 up to $3,000 for children ages six to 17.


The Dependent Care Flexible Spending Act provides for deducting up to 35 percent of child-care expenses for a maximum potential credit of $2,100. The consensus amongst child-care advocates is that the bulk of child-care expenses, for low-income families and middle-class families, are still borne by parents.

There are currently a set of bills that have been sponsored or are in the process of being sponsored in the House and the Senate by Democrats and Republicans to address the child-care crisis. Members of Congress who are championing bills include Sen. Tim Scott (R-SC), Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA), Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), and Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA).

The child-care crisis is a little bit like the Middle East. However you approach it, there are other aspects of the problem that are hard to address at the same time. The problem has been brewing for generations. There is clearly no simple solution to the problem. Nor is there agreement about what the problem is.

The problem starts as soon as a baby is born (cases of adoption are more complicated). The problem in question is who will take care of the child when the child is not in school. Consider these stages:

  • Stage 1: Children are not in school from birth till kindergarten, which is typically age five.
  • Stage 2: Some children are in half-day pre-school, which is typically age four.
  • Stage 3: Children are not in school when first grade is dismissed, which could be 12 pm or 3 pm.
  • Stage 4: Children are not in school when grades second through eight dismiss their students, which is approximately 3 pm.
  • Stage 5: High school, when students are also dismissed at approximately 3 pm.

For children whose parents live in states where there is paid parental leave (Connecticut, Oregon, Colorado, Hawaii, Delaware, New Mexico, South Carolina, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, California, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Maryland as of Oct. 2023), the child-care problem may arise in month three or month six of the child's life.

One of the chief reasons that Congress has not appropriated sufficient funds to address the early stages of the child-care challenge, let alone all of the stages is that Congress, indeed the country, is divided on the question of whether it would be better for families to have a parent at home rather than put children in child-care centers. For decades progressives have fought to give women equal opportunities in the workplace; indeed, they blasted conservatives who they claim kept women trapped in their homes as caretakers for their children and husbands. There has been a backlash against this point of view, one which not only supports giving women the opportunity to be primary caretakers during the work week but men as well.

There is a straightforward solution to the problem: Provide parents with a choice of robust child care support or a tax credit, at least for three years, for a stay-at-home parent, for a mother or father. For example, families might be provided with $15,000 of child-care support for their young child; or they might be provided with a $15,000 tax credit so that the mother or father (or both if they switch from time to time) stays at home to be the primary caretaker. This approach would support both models of parenting in the early years of a child's life. Addressing single parent homes would require special attention since a $15,000 tax credit or transfer payment would probably not be sufficient to support a family with one parent and one child.

The entire child-care problem is very complicated and resolving it will require a lot of money, whether it comes from the federal government, state governments, employers, employee payroll tax deductions, or some combination. Focusing on the child-care crisis -- which is related to the paid parental leave crisis since the child-care crisis is larger to the extent that we do not have a paid parental leave policy -- may be more prudent at this time since momentum has been lost on the paid parental leave effort. The debate will never be resolved about the best way to raise children, and that is why we must support both sides of the debate. Congress must support both models for raising children and parental choices about work/family balance.


Read More

A male senior stands in the shadow of a Social Security card with bite missing.

Social Security faces automatic cuts in 2032 and Medicare in 2033. New polling suggests that gives Democrats a powerful election issue. Here’s the case.

DNY59 / Getty Images

Will the Debt Crisis Engineered by Republicans Succeed in Cutting Social Security and Medicare?

Overview

The Republican Party’s long game to reduce administrative state entitlement spending centers on creating a debt crisis to provide an excuse for limiting such spending. It may soon pay off. That strategy involved a quarter-century of engineered tax cuts responsible for the stunning rise in sovereign U.S. debt, threatening an eventual economic crisis.

Social Security benefits are projected under current law to be automatically cut in 2032. And Medicare benefits are projected to be automatically cut in 2033. Congressional Republicans intend for those automatic cuts to occur, opposing new taxes to prevent cuts. And they are using the ballooning national debt as an excuse to also oppose new general revenue spending to prevent benefit cuts.

Keep ReadingShow less
​Chinese President Xi Jinping (L) and U.S. President Donald Trump followed by Chinese first lady Peng Liyuan and U.S. first lady Melania Trump arrive for a state dinner at the White House.

Chinese President Xi Jinping (L) and U.S. President Donald Trump followed by Chinese first lady Peng Liyuan and U.S. first lady Melania Trump arrive for a state dinner in the East Room of the White House on September 24, 2026 in Washington, DC.

Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images

When Leaders Disagree, Ceremony Plays an Important Role

When Chinese President Xi Jinping arrived at the White House on 24 September, the U.S. welcomed him with an elaborate display of ceremony. The Army Herald Trumpets sounded a fanfare, the Chinese and American national anthems were played, and the Old Guard Fife and Drum Corps performed. A military review was followed by a flyover involving a B-2 bomber and four F-22 fighter jets, according to the White House. It was an extraordinary production for two countries that still disagree on some of the most important issues in international politics.

Talks between President Donald Trump and Xi touched on trade, artificial intelligence and Taiwan. The visit was marked by warm words and some signs of cooperation, but it did not erase the fundamental competition between the United States and China. So why was all this ceremony staged? It is tempting to dismiss political pomp as mere window dressing: an expensive historical relic surrounding the serious business taking place behind closed doors. As a music historian, however, I think this misunderstands what ceremony does. Ceremony can become particularly valuable when words alone are not enough.

Keep ReadingShow less
Americans Voting in an Election

Americans Voting in an Election

Getty Images

Voting Is Not Just a Privilege It Is Every Citizens’ Responsibility

Despite the consistent determinations that US elections are secure across the country and there is virtually no evidence of non-citizens voting, in reports released as recently as September 2026; President Trump has doubled down on his claims that voter fraud is a major problem in America and on October 20th, he announced a new $25 Million Fraud Whistleblower program to be administered by the Department of Justice.

This announcement achieves a variety of the president’s goals: (i) It intentionally perpetuates the misinformation, that voter fraud is a serious problem in the United States; (ii) it undermines the trust in the voting systems, as well as in the states administering the elections; (iii) it fosters distrust amongst neighbors, who are more likely to suspect people of color and report them for a reward. This has the concomitant benefit of (iv) intimidating people who are in fear of going to the polls and (v) It gives the illusion that the federal government is prepared to give away more free money (along with the Tariff rebate checks, the Trump Accounts, the DOGE dividend, the direct payments for healthcare and the $5,000 for supporting GOP midterm candidates.)

Keep ReadingShow less
Capitol building with American flag behind it

Political Polarization and Extremism

Getty Images

Both Parties Have Forgotten How to Lose: It’s Time for Guardrails

On November 3 Americans vote in the midterm elections, and the most important question may be whether the losers accept the result. A Pew survey this summer found that just 55 percent of Americans are confident the midterms will be run fairly and accurately, down from 64 percent in 2022. The partisan detail is more revealing. Since 2024, Republican confidence has risen and Democratic confidence has fallen from 77 percent to 58 percent. Trust in the referee now depends on who holds power.

Democracy rests on a kind of sportsmanship agreement. The theologian Reinhold Niebuhr put it well: man’s capacity for justice makes democracy possible, but his inclination to injustice makes it necessary. B. R. Ambedkar, the chief architect of India’s constitution, called democracy a method of bringing revolutionary change without bloodshed. Both understood that the system works only if the losing side agrees to try again next time instead of burning down the field. Americans in both parties are forgetting how to do that.

Keep ReadingShow less