Senate Republicans Caution Against Rushed Federal Involvement in Child Care Crisis

Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) questions U.S. health officials in Washington on June 16, 2022. (Joe Raedle/Getty Images)

Senate Republicans encouraged lawmakers to “think” before they act when considering what involvement the federal government should have in U.S. child care.

The Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee convened on May 31 to discuss the child care crisis that some Americans are experiencing as well as potential solutions to meet the needs of working families and child care workers.

The hearing saw lawmakers from both sides of the aisle presenting their perspectives on the matter, with HELP Committee Chairman Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) pushing for more federal funding for child care and ranking Republican member Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.), who is a physician, telling his fellow lawmakers that they should think, not “just do something.”

During the hearing, Cassidy expressed his concerns about the rising costs of child care as federal money is invested, cautioning against hastily pouring additional federal dollars into the sector without careful consideration.

He argued that similar patterns were observed in higher education, where increased federal assistance led to skyrocketing costs for students.

“As more federal assistance has gone towards student loans, the cost of higher education has skyrocketed,” he said.

“As [was] pointed out by Matthew Desmond in the book ‘Evicted: Poverty and Profit in the American City,’ when the federal government threw additional money at housing programs, the funding was largely swallowed up by the bureaucracy in charge rather than actually reaching those in need on the ground,” Cassidy said.

He emphasized the importance of ensuring that any federal assistance for making child care affordable doesn’t inadvertently exacerbate the problem or burden taxpayers with ever-increasing costs.

Democrats Favor More Funding

While Democrats advocate for additional federal funding to address child care concerns, proposing an additional $600 billion for a government-run institutionalized child care system, Cassidy expressed concerns about the long-term effects of such a plan.

The hearing also touched on the availability of funds for child care initiatives, with billions allocated through the end of the next fiscal year.

Other topics related to health care reauthorization were also brought up during the hearing. Among them was a study conducted by the Mercatus Center that revealed that eliminating certain regulations could potentially reduce the cost of care by as much as $1,900 per child per year.

This finding highlights the importance of streamlining regulations to make child care more affordable without compromising the quality of care provided.

Concerns were also voiced by expert witnesses about the consequences of federal involvement in child care.

The contentious battles witnessed in K–12 education, including debates about sex education, masking policies, and the use of pronouns not correlating with biological sex, could extend to local daycares and preschools if the government becomes the primary funder and rule-setter for approved daycare providers.

Expert witness Kathryn Larin, who serves as director of the U.S. Government Accountability Office’s Education, Workforce, and Income Security team, also voiced concern about the potential risk of child care centers being subjected to shifting political agendas and changing regulations—a topic of interest among committee members.

“Head Start kids were among those who are forced to wear masks longer than just about anybody else,” Larin said.

“Long after we'd realize that adults have been able to take their masks off when we were learning that masks were just not doing any good for kids in schools, they were actually harming them. So I worry about some of these providers or these institutions becoming political footballs.”