{"id":7364,"date":"2017-09-19T07:06:24","date_gmt":"2017-09-19T13:06:24","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/admin.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/?p=7364"},"modified":"2017-09-19T07:06:24","modified_gmt":"2017-09-19T13:06:24","slug":"next-child-care","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/2017\/09\/next-child-care.html","title":{"rendered":"Up next: “Child Care for All”"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<\/head>

\"https:\/\/commons.wikimedia.org\/wiki\/File%3AUS_Navy_050114-N-3659B-050_he_Morale_Welfare_and_Recreation_Child_Development_Center_on_board_Naval_Support_Activity_Mid-South_in_Millington%2C_Tenn.%2C_provides_daycare_services.jpg;<\/p>\n

\u201cMedicare for all\u201d has been the Progressives\u2019 rallying cry for a while now, and Bernie Sanders has gotten 16 co-sponsors on his latest bill, which he himself admits is just an effort to \u201cbegin the debate\u201d and which even Slate criticizes<\/a> for its lack of any funding sources.<\/p>\n

Now, in that same \u201cfor all\u201d spirit, Progressives are promoting a bill being touted as \u201cChild Care for All,\u201d and which came accross my twitter feed as #ChildCare4All. \u00a0Sponsored by Senator Patty Murray, this is a breathtakingly expansive proposal. \u00a0Here\u2019s the summary of the legislation<\/a>, which doesn\u2019t really do it justice, and a fact sheet<\/a> which doesn\u2019t provide many facts; you really have to read the full text<\/a>\u00a0\u2014 or just sit tight while I do the same.<\/p>\n

And, to caveat this properly, this bill, like pretty much everything else, has all manner of amendments to other legislation, which means, on top of a skim of its 95 pages, that I may end up misstating some component or another. \u00a0But here goes:<\/p>\n

Appropriations:<\/p>\n

$20 billion in 2018<\/p>\n

$30 billion in 2019<\/p>\n

$40 billion in 2020<\/p>\n

\u201csuch sums as may be necessary for fiscal year 2021 and each subsequent fiscal year\u201d<\/p>\n

Does this mean that this bill serves as a blank check? \u00a0That spending is unlimited in the same way as, say, food stamps\u2019 spending depends only on how many sign up, not on a specific appropriation (so far as I understand)?<\/em><\/p>\n

\u201cTiered\u201d classification system:<\/p>\n

Each state will develop a system for measuring child care providers, both centers and family-based care, and slotting them into \u201ctiers\u201d based on their quality. \u00a0The standards applied to the \u201centry tier\u201d are\u00a0intended to \u201cincrease in rigor over time.\u201d<\/p>\n

Copayments: \u00a0any participating childcare provider receiving funds in this program may not charge eligible families more than the designated copayment.<\/p>\n

Children with disabilities: \u00a0providers are required to prioritize children\/infants\/toddlers with disabilities with available slots; at the same time, early intervention service providers will provide appropriate services.<\/p>\n

Payment rates: each state will develop a set of payment rates based on a HHS-approved cost-estimation model, with different rates for each quality tier, and optionally with a bonus for providers with nontraditional service hours. \u00a0The cost-estimation model will reflect variations in cost by geographic area, type of provider, age of child, additional expenses associated with providing disability-inclusive care. \u00a0The payment rates will be set to ensure that providers at each tier \u201creceive payment that is not less than the cost of meeting the requirements of such tier,\u201d and that workers are paid wages \u201ccomparable to wages for elementary educators with similar credentials and experience in the State\u201d and \u201cprovide a living wage.\u201d \u00a0(Side note: \u00a0\u201cliving wage\u201d is not defined in the text.<\/em>)<\/p>\n

Parents\u2019 copayment:<\/p>\n

For family income less than 75% of the state\u2019s median income, no payment is required.<\/p>\n

For 75% \u2013 100% of median income, the copayment increases to 2% of family income (total, regardless of the number of children).<\/p>\n

For 100% \u2013 125%, up to 4% of income.<\/p>\n

At 150% of income, 7% of that income. \u00a0And above 150%, the subsidy vanishes.<\/p>\n

Note that \u201cfamily income\u201d is never defined. \u00a0And, to avoid confusion, this is not the usual 150% of poverty line, this is 150% of median income, which is, across the country, about $60,000 at the moment.<\/p>\n

Various sums of money are also allotted for the purpose of constructing or renovating facilities to be used for childcare, with priority given to daycare centers providing inclusive care for the disabled, care during nontraditional hours, rural providers, and poor areas, or to provide grants to improve quality, for instance, by moving informal care providers into the formal tiered system of care, or to move lower-tier providers into upper tiers. \u00a0States can also use grant money to establish or support resource and referral agencies. \u00a0can fund training for child care workers (including in-service type training as well as scholarships for credentials and apprenticeship programs).<\/p>\n

The FMAP:<\/p>\n

That\u2019s the key, apparently. \u00a0FMAP means Federal Matching Assistance Percentages, and these are the percentages \u2014 varying between 50% \u2013 83% by state \u2014 that the federal government kicks in for such programs as Medicaid, with the state providing the remainder. \u00a0This is the state\u2019s \u201cskin in the game.\u201d \u00a0However, these predefined percentages don\u2019t apply for infants or toddlers (under age 3), where the federal government will pay 90% of costs, and \u201ccosts incurred by the STate in carrying out sections 658H and 658K\u201d (which appear to be background checks and reporting requirements<\/a>) are covered at 50%.<\/p>\n

Nondiscrimination: \u00a0no one may be discriminated against, yadda yadda yadda. \u00a0If the government cash is less than 80% of the operating budget, then the provider may, for slots not \u201cfunded directly with assistance provided,\u201d favor families which participate in the \u201cactivities\u201d of the organization.<\/p>\n

High quality preschool: \u00a0states will also make grants to \u201cexpand access to high-quality preschool programs for all children.\u201d \u00a0I\u2019m not sure that the difference between \u201chigh quality preschool\u201d and \u201chigh quality childcare\u201d is, except that the former seems to be more school-like and perhaps it\u2019s presumed that these grants will be focused on programs providing benefits through schools. \u00a0Is \u201cpreschool\u201d intended to be similar to existing preschools used by parents who don\u2019t need full-day care but just want a school-preparing experience? \u00a0It lists subjects that these preschools should teach \u2014 but, of course, this \u201cacademic\u201d instruction can be done in learning-by-doing fashion, or as seatwork. \u00a0There\u2019s also more money handed out to make Head Start a full-day, year-round program.<\/p>\n

So what\u2019s the bottom line?<\/strong><\/p>\n

I know there are a lot of progressives who dream of a system similar to that in Sweden, in which everyone works, and everyone has virtually free daycare, as much as they want. But does Murray\u2019s bill even make sense?<\/p>\n

On the one hand, the bill promises as much virtually-no-cost daycare as you can possibly imagine; on the other hand, the bill speaks of priorities for available slots. \u00a0Is the expectation that even the relatively minimal cost the states are required to shoulder, is enough to limit state spending, and motivate them to be tightwads, in the same manner as Medicaid does? \u00a0Or will there, in fact, be limits on the amount of money allocated?<\/p>\n

Would available slots be doled out on a per-family basis? \u00a0Would there be slots allocated per provider, to dole out themselves, with some kind of waiting list? \u00a0Would states economize by providing slots for the lower-tier\/cheaper providers, or would families be able to elect any provider they choose \u2014 in which case, if your copay is fixed, you\u2019d pick the highest-ranked provider that\u2019s nearby.<\/p>\n

And if you do the math, the top-earning eligible families would pay 7% x $90,000 = $6,300 per year, or $121 per week, regardless of how many kids you have. \u00a0Earn $90,001 and \u2014 well, it\u2019s a moot point because you wouldn\u2019t. \u00a0Families would do the math very carefully to stay below this income level because the loss of the subsidy would be far too costly.<\/p>\n

In fact, this provision of very generous childcare benefits for middle-income earners (or some lucky, slot-obtaining portion of them), benefits contingent on the provider paying their workers at public schoolteacher payscales, would have very distorting effects on the market of providers, in general, as full-cost-payers would see their expenses rise substantially, if the providers are fulfilling the wage and other requirements needed to accept voucher families. \u00a0Unless, that is, there were, in the end, too few voucher families in a given location to distort the market \u2014 but in that case, those families would presumably be unable to find providers, because the cost of accepting voucher families, in the pay increases it would require, would be too much.<\/p>\n

Oh, and besides which: \u00a0for the poor, there is consensus that childcare vouchers to make it possible for single mothers to work, is something the government should be providing. \u00a0But for the middle class, this program of incredible generosity for some, lack of available places for others, makes no sense. \u00a0Most people would rather have a moderate subsidy than a chance of winning the lottery, or none at all \u2014 and for families to hear a message of generosity and then find out it\u2019s not actually in the cards, will not be received favorably.<\/p>\n

And yet \u2014 the bill appropriates \u201csuch sums as may be necessary\u201d with no true reckoning of its cost, let alone any proposal to fund the program. \u00a0And the \u201cfact sheet\u201d omits this \u201cfact\u201d as well.<\/p>\n

So I don\u2019t quite know what to make of it. \u00a0Clearly, like Sander\u2019s Medicare bill, this is a bill written by people who want to make a statement rather than think this could be an actual law as it stands. \u00a0But the statement seems to be, \u201cwe\u2019ll give some of you<\/em> ponies.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n

Image: \u00a0https:\/\/commons.wikimedia.org\/wiki\/File%3AUS_Navy_050114-N-3659B-050_he_Morale_Welfare_and_Recreation_Child_Development_Center_on_board_Naval_Support_Activity_Mid-South_in_Millington%2C_Tenn.%2C_provides_daycare_services.jpg; By U.S. Navy photo by Photographer\u2019s Mate 3rd Class Joseph M. Buliavac [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons<\/p>\n<\/body><\/html>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

\u201cMedicare for all\u201d has been the Progressives\u2019 rallying cry for a while now, and Bernie Sanders has gotten 16 co-sponsors on his latest bill, which he himself admits is just an effort to \u201cbegin the debate\u201d and which even Slate criticizes for its lack of any funding sources. Now, in that same \u201cfor all\u201d spirit, […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2209,"featured_media":4547,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[291,73,161],"class_list":["post-7364","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-uncategorized","tag-child-care","tag-childcare","tag-daycare"],"yoast_head":"\nUp next: "Child Care for All"<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\""Medicare for all" has been the Progressives' rallying cry for a while now, and Bernie Sanders has gotten 16 co-sponsors on his latest bill, which he\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/2017\/09\/next-child-care.html\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Up next: "Child Care for All"\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\""Medicare for all" has been the Progressives' rallying cry for a while now, and Bernie Sanders has gotten 16 co-sponsors on his latest bill, which he\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/2017\/09\/next-child-care.html\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Jane the Actuary\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2017-09-19T13:06:24+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/533\/2016\/05\/1024px-thumbnail.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"768\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"500\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Jane the Actuary\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Jane the Actuary\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/2017\/09\/next-child-care.html\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/2017\/09\/next-child-care.html\",\"name\":\"Up next: \\\"Child Care for All\\\"\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2017-09-19T13:06:24+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-09-19T13:06:24+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/#\/schema\/person\/ed9b99e0bd58c5eeeebae6b82fa5a77a\"},\"description\":\"\\\"Medicare for all\\\" has been the Progressives' rallying cry for a while now, and Bernie Sanders has gotten 16 co-sponsors on his latest bill, which he\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/2017\/09\/next-child-care.html#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/2017\/09\/next-child-care.html\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/2017\/09\/next-child-care.html#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Up next: “Child Care for All”\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/\",\"name\":\"Jane the Actuary\",\"description\":\"\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":\"required name=search_term_string\"}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/#\/schema\/person\/ed9b99e0bd58c5eeeebae6b82fa5a77a\",\"name\":\"Jane the Actuary\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/8d6a493d380e87d49599d5487691c9fc?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/8d6a493d380e87d49599d5487691c9fc?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Jane the Actuary\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/author\/actuaryjane\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Up next: \"Child Care for All\"","description":"\"Medicare for all\" has been the Progressives' rallying cry for a while now, and Bernie Sanders has gotten 16 co-sponsors on his latest bill, which he","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/2017\/09\/next-child-care.html","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Up next: \"Child Care for All\"","og_description":"\"Medicare for all\" has been the Progressives' rallying cry for a while now, and Bernie Sanders has gotten 16 co-sponsors on his latest bill, which he","og_url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/2017\/09\/next-child-care.html","og_site_name":"Jane the Actuary","article_published_time":"2017-09-19T13:06:24+00:00","og_image":[{"width":768,"height":500,"url":"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/533\/2016\/05\/1024px-thumbnail.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Jane the Actuary","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Jane the Actuary","Est. reading time":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/2017\/09\/next-child-care.html","url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/2017\/09\/next-child-care.html","name":"Up next: \"Child Care for All\"","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/#website"},"datePublished":"2017-09-19T13:06:24+00:00","dateModified":"2017-09-19T13:06:24+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/#\/schema\/person\/ed9b99e0bd58c5eeeebae6b82fa5a77a"},"description":"\"Medicare for all\" has been the Progressives' rallying cry for a while now, and Bernie Sanders has gotten 16 co-sponsors on his latest bill, which he","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/2017\/09\/next-child-care.html#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/2017\/09\/next-child-care.html"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/2017\/09\/next-child-care.html#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Up next: “Child Care for All”"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/","name":"Jane the Actuary","description":"","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":"required name=search_term_string"}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/#\/schema\/person\/ed9b99e0bd58c5eeeebae6b82fa5a77a","name":"Jane the Actuary","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/8d6a493d380e87d49599d5487691c9fc?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/8d6a493d380e87d49599d5487691c9fc?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Jane the Actuary"},"url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/author\/actuaryjane"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7364","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2209"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=7364"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7364\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/4547"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=7364"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=7364"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/janetheactuary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=7364"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}