According to media reports, the Trump administration is planning to subsidize and incentivize married families who choose to have a spouse stay at home and care for their child or children.
The drafted proposal reportedly revises a current federal child care subsidy program.
The existing “Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF)” sends federal money to states, which then have the authority to distribute it to individuals and families. It evolved over the years following welfare reform, which attempted to tie assistance to work. With more parents working, government officials determined that parents needed more assistance to pay for child care.
Currently, over 870,000 families or 1.4 million children receive the subsidy under the program.
Since beginning his second term, President Trump has vowed to lead the way in advocating for policies that encourage and serve the traditional nuclear family. Two recent changes have included an increase in the Child Tax Credit to $2,500, as well as “Trump Accounts” – an investment vehicle that was made available for American children and launched with a $1,000 per child contribution from the government.
The proposed revision would allow eligible families to receive about $9,000 per child per year. Parents would not have to use the money to pay an outside child care provider; instead, the proposal would allow a parent to receive assistance for caring for his or her own child.
Saturday’s New York Times published an excerpt it had obtained from the actual draft of the proposal, in which the Department of Health and Human Services’ Administration for Children and Families said, “[The proposal] creates the option for a new category of care, parent-based child care, that will allow one married parent to receive CCDF assistance to care for their own child, while a spouse works at least 35 hours per week.”
Under the new proposal, eligible married parents would also have to demonstrate their family income is lower than 85 percent of their state’s median income.
A recent analysis has determined that mothers and fathers spend, on average, nearly $17,000 per child, per year. This includes the cost of housing, food, clothes, health care, etc. Of course, that figure can vary widely based on where the child is being raised and decisions made by the mom and dad.
At the root of the drafted proposal is a fundamental flaw with the current CCDF program. Whether intentionally or not, the government is favoring families where both parents are working outside the home – an issue that Vice President JD Vance has insisted must be addressed.
“Federal policy should not be forcing one particular family model,” said the vice president, who has also been critical of so-called universal child care, which is a public system that would use taxpayer money to pay for taking care of children. Vice President Vance has called that “a massive subsidy to the lifestyle preferences of the affluent over the preferences of the middle and working class.”
Back in 2021 as a senator, Vance was blunt in his opposition, suggesting, “It turns out that normal Americans care more about their families than their jobs, and want a family policy that doesn’t shunt their kids into crap daycare so they can enjoy more ‘freedom’ in the paid labor force.”
Rather than an expansion of the current $12 billion Child Care and Development Fund, the drafted proposal would reportedly be budget neutral and reallocate funds in a way to comport with new eligibility rules. This would effectively mean some families who are currently receiving the subsidy would no longer be entitled to it.
Critics of the proposed change are not only objecting to that shift but also questioning whether a government program can legally tie marriage to eligibility. Daycare providers are also objecting. The New York Times story quotes Krystal Gastineau, who owns a childcare facility in Colorado, and who says half of her clients receive the federal subsidy. Her objection, though, is telling.
“If they could, I think parents would choose to take the money and stay home,” she said. “That would take away a major source of income.”
It would be impossible to overstate the many benefits a child receives from growing up with a stay-at-home mother in the home. Studies have confirmed that it’s an ideal arrangement and that boys and girls need their mothers to emotionally thrive during those early years of development. As a ministry, Focus on the Family has long acknowledged that it may not always be possible – but has nevertheless encouraged mothers and fathers to prayerfully and creatively navigate those challenges.
Focus on the Family applauds policy efforts to prioritize and incentivize the nuclear family. Please join us in praying for this effort and for an outcome that will encourage and best serve married mothers and fathers.
Photo courtesy of Shutterstock.
