Universal child care should be provided by parents and their families, not by the government.
44
@Michael So glad to read that I'm not the only one who recognizes this truism. No government or social program can take the place of a family.
16
Moms and Dads, don't have kids unless you have the means, ability, and motivation to take care of them yourselves.
That's it. That's the only sane "universal child care plan."
46
@hula hoop
This is the best comment ever. I completely agree.
13
I don't have children, a choice I made consciously. Quite frankly, I find it distinctly unfair how often those of us who do not have children are asked to pay for things, whether in time or money, for those who do. Having children is not a need, but rather a lifestyle choice. I support, gladly, paying more taxes for universal healthcare. That benefits everyone and so everyone should pay for it. I do not want to pay more taxes for your choice to have a child. If you want kids, plan for them and plan to pay for them yourself.
172
@magnolia311
First of all, not everyone has children voluntarily. Especially these days, with attacks on reproductive freedom. You know that, right?
Second of all, children are citizens of this country and they need care. It's no different from paying for care for the sick or the poor or the very elderly. There might be (I think there are) reasons to try to encourage people to have fewer kids, but once the kids are here, they're here, and they're citizens.
Third, some would people benefit a LOT more from health insurance than others. Some people will lose a lot more in insurance payments than they will ever gain back.
171
@bess
Fair enough.... but your demand of equality for all citizens in all things is a bit of hypocrisy when you expect all citizens to carry the financial load for parents choosing to have large families. THAT is not fair to more modest family sizes and families without children.
We already have primary inequality in the use of property taxes to largely fund public schooling. I support better educational support and care for children, but there has to be better ways to fund it than simply continuing to drain citizens pockets in an unfair manner.
58
@Chuck
"... there has to be better ways to fund it than simply continuing to drain citizens pockets in an unfair manner."
Could, you please, describe how to "drain citizens pockets" in a fair manner?
Or perhaps suggest a more useful perspective on the whole issue?
25
Can we get Joe into the white House before we start having to have him pass Purity Tests??
102
Having children is a choice. Why should I pay for a choice YOU make?
27
Good heavens, the man was all but politically dead one short week ago! Get a grip, give the man and his campaign some time to address this issue. Or just vote for Trump...
12
How about he just get elected first?
21
Contrary to his false image as a man for the working folks, Biden's record shows him to be a man of the large corporations.
17
Oh, the list of free things just gets longer. And I want a pony.
24
This Canadian pleads with you to keep your eyes on the ball. Get rid of KD.
Policies can come later.
7
Amy Klobuchar supported far reaching child care. It would be a good job for her as Vice President.
12
Joe doesn't need a universal child care plan. Why, oh why, do leftist extremists expect every Democratic candidate to kiss their ecclesiastical bottoms? Isn't it enough that Joe wrestles the devil to the edge of the abyss? Isn't it enough that the rest of us are teetering on the cusp of economic oblivion? NO!!! Joe needs to change Trump's diaper.
Enough!
18
This is one of the things that Ross D. won't have to worry about.
Goodie.
1
Why does anyone think the government should provide your children childcare? If you reproduce and have children then it should be your responsibility not Joe Biden's or Bernie's or Elizabeth's or Congress. If you can't afford to live and raise kids then don't have any but leave the government and elections out of it.
20
WOW! A NYT opinion piece that disparages Joe Biden! Stop the presses! Recall the edition! There was a mistake!
Okay, enough poking at the bias of the NYT. It is refreshing though to finally see some questions being raised about Biden and what he stands for. We've endured endless questions of Sanders (and Warren) summed up under the "How are you going to pay for that?" Up to a point, a fair question, but why was it never directed at anyone else? Did anyone ever ask Mayor Pete how he was going to pay for "Medicare For All Who Want It (with exceptions and qualifications)"? Or Biden for his similar "plan"?
For that matter, just what ARE Joe's plans? I mean besides "Turn the clock back to 2012"? The world has undergone massive change in the past decade, and we need new and innovative ideas to deal with all of that. But Biden is stuck in the past. And even his best ideas are ones that came from Obama, not him. Left to his own, he would follow a classic conservative playbook, ignoring racial and gender bias, income inequality, climate change, and the devastating effect of the "trickle down" these past 40 years.
So don't hold your breath waiting for Biden to propose anything like free childcare. But I expect Sanders will make this an issue, as it should be. As schools are shut due to the coronavirus panic, how will parents who have to work be able to handle this? Free childcare and MFA would help. This is a case where events shape campaigns. Biden isn't nimble enough to adjust.
14
Joe Biden has no plan. He wants to be president but he has not plan that interests anyone. Moderates are not voting for Joe they are trying to vote for another other than a progressive.
I dont know about you but I dont more Obama and I voted for him twice.
read this article by a black professor from princeton about obama. he is a democrat.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/05/opinion/Biden-Obama-2020.html?searchResultPosition=4
its the truth
i dont anymore of obama
4
“Plans? We don’t need no stinking plans.”
DNC 2020
6
Aww c'mon Bryce! Quit complaining. Bret Stephens nailed it when he said...Joe Biden's presidency won't be great, but average is good enough for him. And we know nobody wants to pay any more in taxes. Do you really want to tax Americans more, just so we could have something as outrageous as universal child care? That's WELFARE! No way. The babies and kids will simply need to tough it out. There you liberals go again with your tax and spend. Isn't being 11th in the world in healthcare outcomes good enough? That sounds pretty average and average is good enough!!!
10
Democratic election strategy amongst supporters appears to focus primarily on extensive and loud criticism of Democratic candidates for not proposing social programs which would not have a snowball’s chance in hell of getting anywhere near Mitch McConnell’s desk, much less becoming law. A more effective approach might be promoting the programs of Democratic senate candidates running against incumbent Republicans, instead of the relentless OpEd criticism of Democratic presidential candidates.
6
So I have to pay for someone else's child care?
42
Subsidizing day care would lead to "the deterioration of the family" and parents being less responsible for their children.
This shows the poor judgment of Joe Biden. I am certain that day care is great for both Republican and Democratic working families!
Yes he is more decent than Donald Trump, but if he is elected president don't expect that Joe Biden will really help families, the poor or the middle class.
11
Where is the sense of personal responsibility for raising a child? Simple: If you cannot afford it, do not do it.
19
As with all other social problems in the US, the most effective solution is not a government sponsored program but rather having 2 parents, of any sex, sexual preference, race, religion or ethnicity, stay together to raise their children, and for one of them to always be at home to care for them during their formative years. Any program which provides support for single parenthood or that allows both parents to work encourages the least effective approach for raising children.
14
@Dr B You do know that most people cannot afford to have one parent stay at home if they want to own a home?
And, that staying at home has a life long impact on the earnings potential of the woman who leaves the work force, because it is almost always the woman.
If you are a doctor, perhaps you believe in science. The research on the benefits of high quality child care programs is strong. Enormous return on investment.
Would you have stayed at home to raise your kids, giving up your career? If not, then why expect others to do so.
19
@MVonKorff Understand your points, but I believe you've not included the most important trade off: do I want to raise my children well or would I prefer to let someone else raise them so I may have stuff, like a house, or pursue a career? If you choose the former, you may do so without a house. If you choose the latter, that's fine, but why should anyone else pay for your choice, especially if they believe it is the wrong choice for the children? Also, as noted by the leading feminist Betty Friedan, for the overwhelming majority of people a job is not a career, but rather a way to make money to let you lead your life outside of work. Most people would prefer to raise their children than work. Note that I am not saying it has to be the woman or even a heterosexual couple, or that either parent has to be home full time. Rather, during the formative years one of the parents should always be with the child.
I am only aware of research that shows that high quality child care programs are better than no programs for children who don't have a stay-at-home parent. I'm not aware of any comparison between a stay-at-home parent vs a child care program. There will always be bad parents, but overwhelmingly a parent will raise a child with more love, attention, and direction than any outsider. It's human nature to care for and protect one's children; for many social workers, its an important job but no where near the commitment, value or effect that a parent provides.
7
People should not have kids if they can't afford them. It is sheer lunacy to have social policy rewarding poor women for having babies by providing childcare paid for by the taxpayer. 7 - 8 billion people in the world many of them poor. Don't need any more.
For all those posting about how other countries have healthcare etc...Those countries have their defense provided for by the US taxpayer and soldier*. That is how those countries afford their lavish social spending.
*Trump tried to get the Europeans to meet their meager NATO spending targets and the DNC and MSM attack Trump rather than siding with the US.
13
People should have fewer children to curb climate change. Not be given economic incentives to have more children.
9
We don't need universal health care. We do need fewer children.
Global warming is caused by too much population growth. Too many women are choosing to have too many children around the globe.
Instead of more benefits for parents, we should have policies which encourage small family size and use of family planning to keep family size small.
Democrats seem to believe in two contradictory notions. First, that global warming is real and should be fought as the highest priority. Second, that population growth has no impact on global warming.
The second notion is clearly false. If we had heeded the warning of Malthus of 1798 that population growth led to poverty, planet earth might now have a population of under a billion people. Global warming would be a minor problem, with ample time to address via technology, such as development of fusion energy.
If we had heeded the warning of Meadows et al. who wrote "the Limits to Growth" in 1972, world population would be about 3.6 billion.
Now with world population at 7.8 billion liberal extremists argue that it is "racist" to even discuss population growth, which leads to fewer children of dark skins.
But this notion of "racism" is backwards. Africa is slated to double in population from current levels by 2050.
This population growth has ALREADY led to immense suffering in Africa. Look at the 5.4 million who lost their lives in the Second Congo War (1998-2003) for example.
We need fewer children to save planet earth.
118
@Blaise Descartes However, in the US, the birth rate has declined below replacement rate.
47
@Blaise Descartes
Global warming will never be a minor problem as long as the driver of it is free. Carbon tax fossil fuels so the price reflects the true cost of use. Use the money to provide truly equal education to all children—particularly girls— and population growth will nose dive. (but it’s the carbon tax that will really save us from climate change, the reduced growth is just a very significant side-benefit).
22
@Blaise Descartes
In re to: "Global warming is caused by too much population growth."
That denies the physics involved. Global warming is predominantly caused by burning fossil fuels. Population growth intensifies it, but isn't the root cause. Even with a declining population. current consumption rates would continue to exacerbate the crisis.
45
Women are the ones who want child care. Women are the ones who want health care (Men would not think twice about skipping annual health checks, but not women). Women are the ones who think about the educational future of their kids and the cost.
Women are the absolute majority of citizens in this country. I sure hope they come out and vote like they really want those things.
(yes, I'm a man. but as a progressive 69 yo ethnic minority, I know most men support the GOP and Trump).
54
Wait, does Biden have ANY plans?
11
Where is Joe Biden's truly affordable health care for all plan?
Where is Joe Biden's plan for corona virus?
Where is Joe Biden's plan for anything really?
I hope he'll offer Warren his VP slot. He needs someone who knows how to problem-solve and get things done.
74
Anytime you hear someone like Pat Buchanan use terms like “family-weakening,” what they really mean is that women should be staying at home taking care of children, vacuuming and cooking supper, preferably in heels and pearls.
13
Who cares.
Get rid of Trump.
Then we can get back to the issues.
5
He doesn't have a plan
7
Best thing Joe could do is ask (beg if needed) for Elizabeth Warren's plans. He can say they were fantastic and are a great starting platform for many of his reforms and polices. He can give her the credit she deserves.
Vote Blue No Matter Who
Trump Undermines R Democracy
every day, every minute
6
Joe Biden's plan is to offer many good liberal policies. Any that you want, you want universal child care? You got it. Just cast a vote for old uncle Joe, friend to Wall Street, where they know there is a profitable market solution to your issue.
2
If you are looking for Joe's plan you might:
-Go to his web site.
-Go to an event and ask him directly.
- Call any one of his campaign surrogates.
- Call his campaign headquarters and tell them that you are with the New York Times.
I am pretty sure they would appreciate your helping to get his plan disseminated.
8
Fill up the House and Senate with folks who will pass this and I am sure Joe will sign it.
7
Oh I think Joe plans on using other people's plans and other people's energy. I think he'll just be a figurehead.
5
Amazing how two men, Buchanan and not the mentioned Gingrich - have so polluted our national social dialogues about some pretty mundane issues. And that they continue to hold sway in some dark corners is scary. Not saying only these two are to blame, but if you're looking for foundational flag-wavers, you cant find two more despicable political influencers.
3
Biden has no plans, basically. If, and it's a big if, he gets elected, nothing will change much. At least Warren had plans, and Sanders has some plans and a broad vision. It continues to amaze me that the USA doesn't look to Finland, Canada, and Norway and take the best from each. The USA seems doomed, face it, and seems to only exist to make much of the world worse. The ACA saves me about $50, and since I live in a good state, I have mental health parity. Also, I live an hour from a good university hospital, so I'm very lucky. We do not want equality in our society. We rarely have. We need a return to the best policies of FDR's days, which saved my grandparents from starving, along with kindness of others. Such kindness is generally gone now, too. In America, all that matters is "Me, first!" and "I've got mine!"
16
The problem of child care is two fold. One, it's a symptom of the fact that the bottom 80% of wage earners haven't seen their incomes grow for three decades. Two, it's a symptom of people having children they can't afford and expecting someone else bail them out of their bad decisions. Address the first symptom, for sure. The second, too bad.
8
I’m reading a lot of valid points in the previous comments, but have to ask: where is the bigger, better, cheaper GOP alternative to the Affordable Care Act they’ve been promising for a decade now? Why do I suspect the Supreme Court is going to drop a bomb on the ACA right after the general election?
6
More fathers should stay home and care for children. My wife and I came to the understanding that due to societal trends, she had a better chance of job advancement and compensation than I did. That was almost 25 years ago.
It worked out great.
5
Whoever wins the Democratic nomination it's imperative that Elizabeth Warren is asked and accepts the job of Vice President.
She will provide the plans and allow the President time to deal with the international mess that Trump will leave.
Win or lose our country no longer has time for rhetorical fixes that sound good but don't deliver and end in a Republican President in four years. Warren can deliver.
9
Yes, every candidate should have a plan on paper.. to soothe all the poltical nerds.
That said.. if we are focused in the general election on universal child care... we as a party and nation are completely off message.
2020 is all about unseating a tyrant and restoring trust and confidence in the office of president. Everything else is secondary... though many platform policy points can in fact be weaponized against Trump and should be.. but we must keep our eyes on the target here.
4
As an educator, I can tell you this country hates children. We feed them garbage in schools. Facilities are decrepit. Teachers are broken from lack of pay and respect. Income inequality has skyrocketed, causing children to suffer unthinkable traumas in the richest country in the history of the world. Kids need parents available to them, affordable child care when they need it, healthcare, enrichment and basic materials. All things the government says it is not required to provide. And here we are. Joe will do nothing. More scraping the edges with useless incrementalism.
26
While we don't want an identity/social engineering zealot Neo con like Hillary who blew the election to the ego maniac demagogue Trump, Biden to insure his win against Trump has now got to address the issues that Trump demagogued in the swing states that got him elected.
Bernie should stress this in his platform.
1-No wars (like the Iraq 2 debacle ) unless American is attacked or about to be attacked.
2-Common sense, fair immigration policy, not open borders.
3-Selected non onerous tariffs on the worst of the slave labor countries taking blue color jobs from the rust belt not an insane Trump trade war against friend and foe alike.
Last but not least, the supreme winning issue for the democrats is a national, quality, affordable health system that the rest of our peer countries have.
Come up with a plan that is done over time, that includes the private sector that has succeeded in other countries. Canada stands out but it could be any number of countries plans.
Child care is important but don't put it on the top of the list.. Do the above first if you want to get elected.
7
Universal child care? It's on the list. Where it should be prioritized is another matter. We can worry about that after we defeat Trump and capture the Senate while keeping the House. But my guess is we shouldn't be making a long study of things once we have the power like Obama did and waste our opportunities to change things because we want to include Republicans in that process. What Obama did in that regard while noble, was politically speaking, naive and stupid. You don't ask the corrupt to help you clean up the mess they created. Priorities are what they are. We have Climate Change. Voter Suppression. Student Debt. Education funding. Medicare for All on our way to universal coverage. Infrastructure. We will have a short period to attack those problems unless a lot of people start reliably getting off the butts and vote DEMOCRATIC. We cannot change everything at the same time. It will take decades to undue the damage of decades of greed and irresponsible actions by corrupt Republicans. So stop dreaming about everything under the sun and start thinking how we will transform society and actualize what we dream about. I believe we introduce Medicare for all, increased educational funding for college students and children, retire educational loan debt and begin rebuilding our infrastructure. We can attack climate change by mostly just getting us back to where we were before Trump and preparing for whatever the scientists tell us are the best options. Vote for it.
3
Reality check: Elizabeth Warren had an intelligent, impressive roster of Progressive plans. She lost, big, in every Democratic Primary so far. Is her lead, her example, really the way to win the Presidency? Why do you believe this? Blaming sexism is a cop-out. Millions of men (like me) voted for Hillary--twice; millions of women didn't, both times.
It matters little what you "fight for!" if you don't do what it takes to persuade enough people to vote for you so that you win.
Even when you win, and you are President, you still cannot enact legislation by fiat; you have to contend with a Senate that, for multiple political reasons, would like to see you fail.
Bill Clinton faced this even though Democrats controlled the Congress (for the first two years) and there was a liberal-leaning Supreme Court. He tried to get a Universal Health Plan into law, but was defeated by the Republicans who came to power as a result of his rapid, activist approach to improve our society.
To accomplish anything worthwhile as President, you not only have to coddle babies in order to win over their parents, you also have to make deals with demons in order to defeat devils.
A confident leader (as opposed to a bomb-thrower, like Bernie) who can persuade public opinion and use it to apply pressure toward incremental change is what has ever worked.
Having said that, I'd love to see Warren as VP, using her own (new-found) quiet persuasion to whip Biden into a more activist Presidency.
6
It seems very unlikely to me that Biden would be against some kind of quality universal child care plan. Why don’t you ask him? The devil of course is in the details: funding and implementation. We are up a Republican establishment that is dead set against welfare for anybody except for corporations and the rich. It’s an excellent item to put on the agenda and everybody I know realizes how great the need is.
5
Where is Donald Trump's plan for reasonable medical care? How does it compare to ANY decent person's plan?
2
"Too many women are choosing to have too many children around the globe."
This is all on women?? Uhhhhhh, last I heard, women around the globe have been dying (literally) for safe, affordable birth control. And men have been denying that access. And taking no responsibility for their half of the role in making babies, as this comment illustrates.
15
Hopefully nowhere! I’d love to see Biden work to raise people’s wages; then parents would be able to afford the child care arrangement of their choice!
5
This is the guy who wanted to cut Social Security and who made it impossible for someone in the middle class to declare bankruptcy. Biden will resurrect the Obama presidency where it left off, looking for a "Grand Bargain". Mitch McConnell must be salivating at the prospect of dealing with this rube. If Warren lends her endorsement to Biden, she should exact concessions from him on paper, in blood.
5
We already have childcare programs for the poor. They need a helping hand. For the rest, be adults. Make informed choices. Run your life responsibly. The state is not your nanny.
6
Where is the Democratic senate necessary to pass any such plan? Maybe if Joe has long coattails we will get one.
It will not be up to Biden. It will be up to Congress. If there is a GOP Senate, it will not matter what Biden or Biden and the House wants. And if a Dem Congress sends Pres. Biden. some child care bill, I am sure Jill Biden will make sure Joe signs it.
2
Who cares? It is so much happing in this country, a universal child care plan should not be a priority
2
Joe Biden can't even speak a coherent paragraph less articulate a single payer health plan. Trump doesn't even care but will eviscerate Biden for any health plan (Communism!), his nepotism (Hunter $50k a month fake job!) and his support for free trade NAFTA! China!). Don't believe any cockamamie theory about moderate suburban Republicans crossing over - I know plenty of them and they will never vote for a Dem - no matter how stunningly corrupt Trump and his own family are. It seems like the Democrats would rather lose than let their left wing take over the party.
We'll see how that pans out.
And the statement "Bernie Sanders and Pete Buttigieg eventually followed suit [on articulating a health plan after Warren]" is false. Sanders called for universal Medicare for All in 2016, paid for by a tax on the very rich and price controls, not some means-tested 2 part Rube Goldberg wonk plan devised by a center left think tank.
If this comment is posted I expect some haters below. I welcome them.
10
Yes. Where are all the freebies that the progressives so desperately want? No student debt, sure! Universal child care, sure! Universal health care, sure! Free college tuition, sure! Feed the hungry, create jobs, eliminate homelessness, improve infrastructure? Not on our list.. what are you going to do for the white 25 year olds, that’s allI I care about..I’m a progressive!
At his Detroit rally, Bernie Sanders reads a 1974 quote of Joe Biden's: "I don’t like the Supreme Court decision on abortion. I think it went too far. I don’t think that a woman has the sole right to say what should happen to her body,” Biden said in the June 1974 article."
5
Dear Bryce,
To quote your girl: "You know, a year ago, people weren’t talking about ....... canceling student loan debt for 43 million Americans ........"
You're right, they weren't talking about it. And some of us think that was a good thing, and the idea of canceling debts that were taken out with full knowledge of the consequences (and benefits!) is malarkey (some might call it populist vote-buying), and an insult to those of us who worked hard and even borrowed within our families to pay cash for our children's college education.
It's a reason I never supported Warren. Great person, lots of good ideas, but too much free stuff.
4
What is the matter with the word means tested?
2
There is no sole front-runner. For now grandpa Joe is that propped up front runner who may or may not be the nominee of the democratic party. The Dem.party is splintered and unlikely to unite behind the final nominee if there is one left standing. New CDC guidance says older adults should 'stay at home as much as possible' due to coronavirus.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/06/health/coronavirus-older-people-social-distancing/index.html
Does that mean Biden and Bernie will cancel their campaign rallies and stay at home and do possibly their greatest service to the nation by contributing to preventing the spread of Corona virus?
Affordable universal health care is something everyone can relate to but universal child care is still enigmatic as to what exactly it means and who pays for it. Does the US become a Soviet style nanny state where the Kremlim would be more than happy to take every child from their parent and along with a freedom to let the child grow up to all the child can be or it decides that your child becomes an Olympic champion or a bellerina or whatever the USSR wanted it to be. Child care like the one in Scandinavian countries would certainly empower parents to provide optimal parenting. But the current state of the Union in the USA, best it has ever been, everything is not hunky dory. The foremost are a problem of homelessness and childhood poverty. A child going to bed without essentials anywhere in the world is gut wrenching for any normal caring adult.
5
Yes, why haven't we heard every single position on every single issue from Joe Biden yet?
It is outrageous!
I think Trump must have a much better Universal Child Care Plan, as he illustrated at the border with Mexico.
4
Move on, Ms. Covert. Even if he had NO plans for anything, at this point, we need to dump Trump. Let the rest take care of itself when, hopefully, the Democrats take the White House and Senate and hold the House, as well. It needs to stop feeling like we live in an occupied country led by an evil dictator....
2
As long as you only vote for "Trump out of office only" you will never achieve anything. Time is running short and you'll just waste some precious time and your own energy.
3
" ...Mike Bloomberg’s early-education plan supported higher-quality and lower-cost child care and universal preschool...."
Hold on. You mean the billionaire that Warren and Sanders have excoriated had a plan for child care? Wow.
"Where’s Joe Biden’s Universal Child Care Plan?"....Where is the Republican plan for universal child care? If universal child care is high on your list, it is pretty obvious who you should be voting for. Because if the head of the ticket doesn't help down ballot candidates, it isn't going to happen
Child care will go to the back of the bus along with single payer or anything else that smacks of safety nets or a leg up for the former Middle Class. “ likable Joe” Biden is a company man, the mega donors who get him elected will say jump, likable Joe, will say yes sir how far. The only thing that got him back in the race was playing up the sympathy vote as directed by Jim Clyburn, the number one ranking African American member of Congress from South Carolina. Mr. Clyburns secret meeting with Biden before the South Carolina voting and Clyburns enormous influence among black Dixiecrats put Joe back in the race. A fascinating article in the weekend F.T. covers in very well. He was told to play up the tragedies in his life, it remained unsaid that he had no other speaking points, his voting history with respect to “ doing good” for the rank and file is abysmal, his part in the credit card imbroglio that disproportionately affect people of color should disqualify him by itself, not to mention his stance on getting us involved in the Iraq War( it should be noted that Mr. Clyburn voted for continual allowance is settlements in Israel with no penalties so we know where his money comes from). As for helping the middle class forget it with Biden, he’s the ultimate company man.
3
Let the battle to shape the nominee begin!
Here:
- "Universal" sounds socialist
- "Child care" sounds like babysitting
Is this health care? education? Welfare?
Only one of those three has unambiguous appeal across the country: education
So let's make public education available for the youngest citizens whose parents want it! It's about literacy and community! And perhaps later since the infrastructure is already there, we'll throw in vaccines and lead testing, and start to train teachers as generalists and medical adjuncts that can also help run local community health centers...
That's the policy and the plan.
But the selling fact should be: pre-school and after-school education has the biggest bang for your buck!
Do not ask people to care about the rising cost of child care or how much work mothers do. Because it's unimaginably large and touches on the great unwashed masses of which we are all a part, it overwhelms people and leads them to ask: I came out ok after watching TV/playing on the internet all afternoon, why can't they?
It's a simple thing: prepare kids for the future!
(But do it the Waldorf way: show them the mysteries of nature and myth, and let them enjoy their childhood.)
1
If Vice President Biden or Senator Sanders is elected, we will have a Supreme Court that is dedicated to the rule of law and supports women’s rights. We will no longer have a president who bragged on film about sexually assaulting women and lied about hush money payments to women. We will have many more women serving in the cabinet and high administrative positions. There will be more women appointed to the federal bench. The U.S will return to the Paris Accords to improve the environment. Appointments to the Labor Relations Board will make unions stronger. These are the things that president have the power to accomplish. Since the Congress, not the president, adopts new laws, including health care, child care, and free education, please take your proposal to Speaker Nancy Pelosi if the Democrats have control of the House and the Senate.
3
Universal child care has been in God's plan from the beginning. It is meant to be provided by parents and families, not by the government.
4
Here's some advice. Let the man dislodge Trump from the White House. Then let him restore some sanity. Childcare, health care, etc. are all in desperate need of attention. But, that's not going to happen if Trump wins another term. In fact, I firmly believe our democratic institutions will collapse if Trump gets another 4 years. Let's all focus on removing him. Vote Biden because he is not Trump. This time around, that will be good enough.
5
I did the math. Each child is a mortgage payment on a moderately priced home. Two kids? For get about it. Daycare will absolutely bankrupt you. One parent is working just to work. This goes on for 5 years for each child. It makes little sense to have children in a household with two professional adults. Basically every household now requires two professional adults. Hence, birth rates are plummeting.
Yet Democrats are advocating the most extremely conservative candidate possible. You do realize parenthood comes with a biological timer, right? Incrementalism isn't going to help. Economics requires decisive action. Otherwise people forgo parenthood. That's the math.
2
Extraordinarily informative column. I did’t know most of this. Convincing too.
1
Cutting child care costs by making them an above-the-line tax deduction for individuals earning below a specified amount (understanding that money flies away in major metropolitan areas on the coasts) is not so tough to do. Making it less stressful and more economically possible for most people raising a family and working is not so tough to do. Before the corporate tax give-aways of the last 50 years, people could survive on one income. Not any more. So Mr. Vice-President, show the big heart and helping hand you are most deservedly reputed to have. Lead the way.
4
"Better late than never" sums up the issue with a Biden candidacy. Always late for the party after grousing about the hosts in a previous life (in this case 1981).
How to bridge the gap from the belief that child care subsidies will cause deteriorate family structures and encourage parents to evade responsibility for their children to full-throated support of the same? Easy, claim that the times were different then or his words were taken out of context. Come up with his own belated plan or claim to have one secreted away.
Today's parents will most likely answer in unison "OK, boomer." And who, really, can blame them?
2
If you are looking for ideas, please forget Uncle Joe Biden. He has none. His big thing is he can beat Donald Trump...at least that's what he tells us. the most we'll get from Uncle Joe, if he's elected, is four years of quiet, of relative sanity. Forget health care, forget reducing the burden of student loans, forget child care, forget raising the minimum wage. That's not his thing. If those are the tings one want's one had to go with Bernie or Warren. Too bad.
7
I hope Joe Biden gets with it soon and adopts a universal child care plan. Jill Biden is an educator--she should set him straight.
In 1980, I voted for Barry Commoner because I thought Jimmy Carter was too conservative for my tastes. Biggest mistake I have ever made in voting, helping to elect Ronaald Reagan. Democrats can evolve in office, Republicans tend to regress. Joe Biden will have progressive cabinet members who will set the agenda. He needs to look to the progressive wing of the party for his VP pick. Stacy Abrams?
People from the center-left need to think about how Democrats can be united coming into the election if Biden does secure the nomination. This includes selecting a progressive on the ticket, who has broad appeal, and bringing some of the best ideas with broad appeal into the platform.
Biden's policy proposals on his website are good in many areas (go read them if you don't believe me). A strong child care program has been proven to have large return on investment. Affordable, high quality child care should be part of what Democrats stand for.
3
Cut it out. We've just had a viable alternative emerge to the certain catastrophe of Bernie Sanders. Now you want to tear him down. Cut. It. Out. We'll find solutions under a responsible Democratic president, Senate and House. But we need to get there first.
3
While the Republicans are coalescing around Mr.Trump, the Democrats are flailing at each other about all the new programs we need.
Makes me remember why I was once a moderate Republican years ago. The first priority is to get rid of Trump. Without that you can forget about anything else. So give me the best person to do that and then vote for Democratic Senators and Representatives.
The first order of things, IF you control all three elective bodies, would be to reverse Trump's actions on a myriad of issues. Then how do we possibly balance the judiciary including the Supreme Court. After climate, go ahead and thrash out what progressive programs we need AND how to pay for them.
The facts remain, as seen by Joe Biden's comeback, that the middle turns out the voters not the young, nor the progressives. Get the seniors to back our nominee - they elected Trump - and they are the most participatory voting group.
You have to win to get what you want!
4
The truth is you can't look to Biden to lead on many of the issues important to most Americans, in spite of his general working class rhetoric. He will be a compromise president. This is what he has run on.
While of course anything will be better than Trump, conservative Democrats and Republicans alike are not going to tax the wealthy to ensure that American families have healthcare, childcare, and higher education -- the very things we need as a nation to succeed. Remember the very first thing Biden said to his rich donors when he announced his candidacy: you have nothing to worry about with me.
But first he has to be elected and, in case others have forgotten, he is a terrible candidate.
7
I supported Yang because Universal Basic Income is a better way of addressing childcare issues and more politically palatable across the electorate.
With UBI the money remains portable. As young adults the money will help with higher education/training and housing. If you choose to have a family then the money can help with childcare and pre-k. Once the kids are in K-12 then it can help save for college or invest in children in other ways. Finally once the children leave the nest the money helps with retirement planning.
One policy that remedies many issues. Political capital can be focused on passing that one overarching program, rather than having to divide up the political capital into a dozen bills that will each be a massive battle and trimmed down.
In these comments many people are complaining about having to pay for other’s family planning decisions. Once again, UBI sidesteps it. Everyone gets money, regardless of the choices they make.
3
Where all his other plans are. He has no plans other than beating Trump and returning our nation to decency. If we wanted a president with a plan we should have picked Warren. Joe is okay with me -- anyone better than Trump would be OK -- but whatever policies emerge from a Biden administration will depend on his pick for vice president and the quality of his advisers.
2
@Christy That is not really accurate. Joe Biden has policy proposals in many areas that are progressive, including climate action, health care, immigration reform, and others. Take a few minutes to look at his website if you don't believe me.
That said, your basic point is on-the-mark. Biden is a centrist, and his VP pick and cabinet will play a large role in setting the agenda. He should be looking to unite the party by bringing in strong people from the progressive wing if he secures the nomination.
2
Bryce Covert's column is one more reason why we need to see a Democratic majority in the Senate. We know we can expect little creative legislation from a Biden Administration. If the Senate remains in the hands of the self-proclaimed Grim Reaper, McConnel, it will remain the place where bills go to die, regardless of which Democrat wins the presidency. Even if the Senate were to flip and a Democrat takes the presidency, the best we can hope for in the Senate is the willingness to go along with the good, creative, legislation coming from the House. Sadly, both the office of the President and the Senate have turned into rudderless, damaged institutions over the last few years. One election cycle is not enough to heal either institution.
2
We defeat Trump. That's the child care plan. Their future depends on it. First win. Then we can work these thing out. Yes, it is necessary. But to hinge one's decision to vote or not vote against Trump is not logical.
143
@Peninsula Pirate : But if we "win" with Biden, what is he going to do? He doesn't stand for anything but restoring the status quo. He doesn't have a plan for anything but to restore the failing ACA to what it was before Trump took office.
We need someone who is going to bring the changes we need, like affordable healthcare for all. The ACA was never affordable for most of us. And it doesn't cover everyone. And even those who are "covered" get a lot less "coverage" than those with employer-sponsored plans. So many doctors and hospitals that aren't included in plans, and coverage only applies in the state where you purchase your plan!
19
@Peninsula Pirate Exactly. Where is Donald Trump's plan for anything? We can't be critical of Reublicans for being one-issue voters (e.g., abortion) if we on the left are going to do the same.
The only thing that matters is at around noon on Wednesday, January 20, 2021 Donald Trump is no longer President. Anyone who believes for a second that if their candidate is not chosen as the Democratic nominee they not vote is voting for Donald Trump. This is not that hard.
Is Universal Child Care a good idea? Of course it would. But not having it is still so much better than four more years of Trump.
7
So odd that in just a couple weeks in 2008, the US government put together a massive day (and night) care program for corporations and now they're fixing to do it again, but daycare for humans is just tooooo hard.
2
Joe Biden isn't running on plans. He's not running on creating a better future. He's not running on how he'll create a pathway to the middle class for people under the age of 40. He's running on beating Trump: fear of Trump. He's running on "healing" and "restoring dignity to the White House". The problem Biden doesn't address is that Trump and Trumpism aren't going away, even if Biden is elected.
If Biden wins, and doesn't create a pathway to the middle class for the majority of Americans who are currently locked out of the American Dream, the Trumpist GOP will run a far more attractive Trumpist in 2024. Democrats will have turned their backs on a generation of young voters who become cynical and apolitical. As they age, that would likely mean a generation of GOP rule, the further disintegration of the planet, and the extinction of the middle class.
Biden needs to tell us HOW he'll restore the middle class--not just that he was Obama's VP and a nice guy. Whatever your opinion of Sen. Sanders, he's not just running on his personality. He's talking about the future---not the past. That's why young people overwhelmingly support him.
301
@Kraig
Young people may support Sanders, but they have not turned out to vote in the numbers expected. For any hope of defeating Trump the Democratic candidate must get voters to the polls. Otherwise: four more years.
26
@Kraig
Since 1980, the Democrats have failed to provide a true alternative to Reaganism. Instead, under the leadership of men like Bill Clinton and Joe Biden, they adopted most of the premises of Reaganism and promoted policies generally consistent with Reaganism. The Republicans will never disavow Reaganism—he is a hero to them and their wealthy supporters continue to be Reaganites—but as Reaganism started to fail the GOP's white lower and middle class base, the Republicans delivered something new and different to keep their loyalty: Trumpism.
Sanders and Warren offer a true alternative to both Reaganism and Trumpism—something the Democrats could uniquely own. But instead, they've trotted out Biden to run on Reaganism. We'll get to see which Republican ideology triumphs this fall.
59
@Kraig Joe Biden is certainly not running on plans. He is running on a return to yesteryear, the halcyon days of his youth when he and the Republicans used to go out for drinks together. Then they would all sit around of an evening listening to the gramophone (or Victrola).
It will be interesting to see how it goes if he becomes president.
20
I consider myself liberal but I don't agree when people talk about healthcare and childcare being a "right". IMO, rights pertain to one's relationship with the government - i.e., freedom, limiting government interference in people's lives, and to the extent the government acts, to act in a fair and non-discriminatory manner keeping religion out of it. However, I do believe that as a democratic society, we can make choices to improve the lives of citizens and improve the efficient operation of our society as a whole. Along these lines, I believe we should make societal choices to both improve people's lives and to optimize the efficient operation of our society in the present and future. IMO, universal healthcare meets those goals - healthcare improves people's lives and a universal system should reduce societal costs on a macro level Conversely, I think universal childcare only meets the first goal (helps people) but doesn't make childcare more efficient on a macro level. Therefore, I think childcare availability should be achieved by other means - reduction/elimination of taxes for the poor and middle class, higher minimum wage, tax breaks/subsidies for childcare providers. In other words, don't make childcare free/a right/run by the government, but rather an affordable available benefit where it makes sense.
3
Where are Joe Biden's policy ideas on ANYTHING, except for "I'm not Donald Trump" and a "return" to some ill-defined polity of "decency", presumably like Barack Obama's third term.
In another op-ed in today's Times (no reader comments solicited), Michelle Cottle rattles off a few things Biden needs to address as a candidate: son Hunter, inappropriate touching, incoherent rambling, etc.
But conspicuous by its absence is any exposition of actual policy ideas or promises that would actually help people in the dire circumstances that everyone except for complacent "centrists" and center-right pundits think is needed.
Is "return to decency" simply the refurbished empty platitudes of "hope and change" for 2020. That's aiming pretty low. It does nothing for progressives or those who want to address our serious underlying national problems.
If you are concerned either with whether "no policy" and "return to normalcy" is not up to the task of being a winning platform, or what things look like after four more years of second term Obama gridlock and stasis, it's not looking real good from my perspective as someone who thinks real changes are needed.
7
The question is how Biden will succeed to create a bit of universal child care.
It's likely that universal chid care is on Biden's radar.
In contrast, Bernie Standers has proposed $60 Trillion in new programs but has only identified $30 Trillion in new revenue. And this from a candidate who only introduced 7 bills that became law after 30 years in Congress (two of which were renaming Post Offices).
Sander's overpromising is one of the reasons that Biden is leading.
4
Does America want to be a capitalist or socialist economically run country. It can't be both, can it? We can always print more monies for our programs to cover the costs of what we can't afford. Or perhaps have others pay more taxes instead of giving more tax breaks, refunds, credits ect. that we so dearly treasure personally every April. Think we might be able then to afford these programs. Would we be willing to share in this program? Doubt it, greed has a special place in American society, so no, not from my wallet.
@Kerm :
Does America want to be run by corporate monopolies, like it is now, or do the citizens want to end corporate socialism?
8
@Kerm
This argument is so lame...
How comes, then, that other developed countries that are no less capitalistic can and do afford:
Universal childcare
Free (or nearly free) universities
Free healthcare
Vastly improved public transport
Significantly better roads, schools, public buildings
3
Biden will do none of these things.He will do what his donors tell him to do.
30
@gene-- Looks like Bloomberg will be a big donor and is interested in child care. Oh, wait a minute , that's not the gospel according to Warren and Sanders.
2
Biden's overarching plan, as best as I can tell, is what he told a gathering of wealthy donors at a fundraiser in 2019: "Nothing would fundamentally change" if he's elected.
Given the alternative, I'll obviously be voting for him if he wins the nomination, but I won't be expecting much.
11
I would rather have Trump .
3
Clearly this is a socialist idea. Think back to all the other socialist ideas that came out of FDR (actually from his Secretary of Labor -- a woman). Social Security, Minimum wage, Child labor laws, universal child care, and almost -- almost, but not quite- universal healthcare. This is the only thing Frances Perkins could not get.
Wow. These sound like the voices of Warren and Sanders. If you want to throw back society into the past, don't make it to the 1950s, toss us back to the days of FDR and start again from there. We might just be a far better society today than what we are.
But, socialism is not good for America. Nope. So, I propose that we get rid of Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, Farm supports, minimum wage laws, unemployment insurance, the FDIC, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, child labor laws, union labor laws, on and on and on. Then let's see how people feel about Socialism.
48
@Joseph
Americans believe the only good socialism is Corporate Socialism. Americans believe only the poor should pay taxes, never the rich, and have voted over and over and over, for decades, for this ideal.
22
Get it through your head. Democratic voters don't really care about these things right now. The things they care about, #1-#10 on the list, are all....beat Trump. We can work out the details later. The thing everyone needs to do is stop looking for the perfect candidate. The one who has every base covered. And has a way to pay for it that will come off the money tree growing in your back yard and not out of your pocket. And recognize A. Any Democrat from Bernie through all the others to Joe will do more for you than any Republican. B. If you think that Republican policies will save you lots of money, you are wrong. Tax cuts for the rich are coming out of everyone else's pocket. A Republican 'health care' system will cost you lots of money. Etc, Etc. and C. All that matters is getting Democratic voters to go to the polls and voting against Trump.Forget the 'issues'. Forget about Hunter. Forget about Joe's gaffes. Go look in the mirror and repeat after me: Trump is not turning my life around. Then put on a blindfold, go to the polls and pull the lever for all Democrats. It's very easy to do. And you will thank yourself for doing it after it's all over.
13
@Walking Man it will be business as usual -- working class Americans going into debt over healthcare, child care, and education while the privileged classes enjoy the boost to their stock portfolios.
2
If we had universal health care, parents would have more money to pay for childcare.
28
I am vehemently opposed to universal child care as proposed by the so-called progressive candidates. I would be open to the following: 100% subsidy for the first child, 50% for the second, and then nothing (maybe even a surtax). Having one child is a right (most of us are, after all, wired to want kids), two a choice, three or more a privilege. Given the role of human overpopulation vis-a-vis climate change, it is downright irresponsible to subsidize child care beyond those levels.
10
@Choi
Your comment is so spot-on that I took a screen shot of it! I completely agree.
2
The idea may be good but the economic facts are nonsense. And is anyone seriously arguing that parents have no responsibility for pay for their children's care? To what end: transferring income from single taxpayers to joint taxpayers? And where does this fit in priority? Ahead of infrastructure? Ahead of universal healthcare? Ahead of global warming? Ahead of food stamps? The government can't pay for every expense in your life.
12
@Kent Kraus
I read an article recently, in another newspaper. The title was something like: "Consider the cost of doing nothing."
Some voters are so afraid, so opposed to paying for benefits going to others that they overlook the fact that, as a country, we are all in the same boat, and that it takes sense to make sure that all crew members can function "full strength and full time"; otherwise, the boat may sink.
11
@Kent Kraus :
In the real world, countries like Norway not only have state sponsored child care, but a huge Sovereign Wealth Fund stocked with cash. They also have universal healthcare, pay for the kids education.
Not only do they pay for healthcare, child care, education, retirement, but did I mention they have a huge Sovereign Wealth Fund where they keep their surplus cash?
8
@Kent Kraus We don’t pay out of pocket for K-12. Universal Pre-K and Childcare would simply extend K-12 down to infancy. We do this because our society and culture recognizes it as an essential common good that helps everyone in society.
Universal childcare would extend that vision of the common good. Mountains of studies show that early childhood lays the foundation for many outcomes that emerge later in life. Neurological pathways are formed that have a big impact on how well people think and feel for the rest of their life. If you want less crime, illness, and other mal-adaptive behaviors in the coming decades, you invest in people to avoid those outcomes.
Our economy has shifted from being able raise a family on one income to one where two incomes barely holds the ground for large swaths of the population. In addition, huge numbers of those workers do not have sick or vacation time, so there is a massive amount of stress on families to be able to just function. This creates a lot of stress that gets transferred into children. Universal childcare would relieve this pressure, making for healthier and more productive citizens.
We live in the richest economy that humanity has ever seen. Other countries are able to provide universal childcare, and see positive results in their populations. The USA can do this too.
12
Michael Bloomberg and his friends understand that VP Biden doesn’t have any developed plans for anything, and that he’s the status quo candidate. It’s the reason that some of the OP-Ed writers keep, praising him. The loot will continue to be funneled to Wall Street and billionaire offshore accounts. Nothing else will change. Still, he’s better than Sanders. The battle for justice continues and those who killed the Warren campaign may in fact have exacerbated future public outrage.
2
Elizabeth Warren herself who wrote, "The Two Parent Trap." Perhaps progressives could ponder the message of that title.
The simple-minded ideology of measuring women's "equality" by their participation in the workplace outside of the home does damage to the children raised without their parents at early, crucial moments in the development of their personalities. The communal and therefore impersonal method of raising children implicit in universal child care results in impersonal, entitled adults.
Empathy cannot be commodified. It exists only between actual humans, not institutions, governmental or otherwise. It is learned by example and correction one on one, first between parent and child, and only later as children learn to navigate the larger society.
The question is why as a culture we would want to privilege work over family, taking children away from their parents, depressing wages by flooding the market with too many workers, and then turn around to create a pale substitute for family on the taxpayers' dime.
I am broadly-minded as to how to raise children. Stay-at-home fathers, gay parents, whatever! All good! The important thing is that PARENTS raise their children. The warmest, best minder in a day care center is but a brief stop on a child's journey to adulthood. A good parent is forever.
Perhaps a plainer car, a smaller house, an antenna instead of cable, but a parent to whom a small child can turn for comfort and guidance would make for happier adults.
5
@D I Shaw
For a mother to stay at home with the child or children, that takes money. Are those opposed to government-subsidized child care willing to support the "family allowances" system used in some other countries?
7
@ D I Shaw, Senator Warren book is titled "The Two - Income Trap" and has nothing to do with your allegation of war on parents. Perhaps if those who claim to love children so much spent a little less time waging bitter ideological class war against actual children and more time considering how literally almost every single other country on Earth have a child Care policy progress could be made?
Sorry kids, you MUST grow up in poverty because that keeps corporate taxes low....
2
Can we please start with drug costs, healthcare, Social Security and Medicare preservation,and climate change mixed in with infrastructure failure. OK, any progressive plans. Democratic Party leadership are you listening? Biden needs to start looking forward.
5
Many Americans are too fearful of change even when it would be to their advantage to support Sanders or Warren. Sanders in particular is committed to a holistic program to benefit Americans. He doesn't offer a patchwork quilt of a program here, a program there, with gaps in between, but a tightly woven tapestry like that which exists in virtually every civilized industrial nation.
If Joe Biden becomes the Democratic candidate for president it is precisely because he has no interest in progressive policy implementation, and will continue to serve corporate interests as he always has. There is no rationale for his sudden resurrection other than to protect the DNC donor mob from Sanders' determination to ensure economic justice After 45 years as an advocate for financial institutions, chief water bearer for credit card sharps and military-industrial cons, Biden, obviously enfeebled by age and possible dementia is unlikely to change.
46
@John Bacher Completely agree with you! Well said!
4
@John Bacher
Conspiracy theory (please remember, you read about it here first):
The (bad, bad) DNC knows that Biden is "mentally incapacitated" but still good enough to get elected. Their (bad, bad) plan is to have him nominated, after which he will choose Hillary Clinton as his vice-president, and then (his bad, bad job done) he will resign. Et voila, le tour est joue! [all accents missing, sorry for that].
2
I can't fathom how the majority of Democrats still can't endorse a nominee with universal health care for its citizens, children and adult just like the rest of the developed countries.
For Biden, a professional politician, will definitely be better than chief lier occupying the White House for sure, but I don't think Biden presidency will progress average American remarkably compared to Bernstein-Warren presidency.
And Biden will certainly maintain or increase defense budget and endless wars.
31
@Dan Um, Congress sets the budget, the President only recommends. If there is an increase in the defense budget it will be because the House and Senate vote for it, not because the President proposes it.
3
@Dan
"Bernstein-Warren"? I think you mean Bernie Sanders/Warren.
2
As a mother, I don't want to pay higher taxes to fund federally regulated childcare. I don't want to live in a country where women are pushed out of the home, whether we want to or not. Most women prefer to cut back at work when they have children. We have babies because we WANT to be with them.
Almost every mom I know, with a few exceptions, either a) is vocally glad she quit work and loves being with her kids or b) wishes she could quit or work part time. I have so many mom friends who say things "I wish I would just get laid off," "you are so lucky to be able to afford to be home," "feminists ruined it for us."
And these are well educated, professional women in the Northeast, the crowd that is supposed to "Lean In."
I could support a plan to give families with children a bigger tax break or a cash benefit, so we could use it to spend as we wish - whether by having one parent stay home or cut back at work, to support a family member or friend who is providing childcare, or a to help cover institutional care.
But neither I, nor most women, want a Scandinavian style system where taxes make stay at home motherhood fiscally impossible and culturally non-existent. No thanks.
Ultimately the best "childcare" plan is a strong economy that gives both mothers and fathers better leverage for flexibility and good wages, so we can come up with the plan that is best for our own families.
14
@A F It must be wonderful to be able to stay at home to care for children and still have enough money to pay insurance premiums in the wealthiest state in the union; unfortunately most Americans don't have that luxury. Most parents, both male and female, have to work to provide the basics for their children, which include child care (when they can afford it) and health insurance, which takes a huge bite out of the family finances. And then there are all those who work and still can't afford a home as well as any of those other things. To argue as you do is to be completely insensitive to the needs of people not as wealthy as you are.
26
@Alex Levy
Exactly what I thought when I read her comment, but you said it much better than I could have.
6
@A F and you are speaking for most women because...? I am the mother of two great sons. Both are grown up and very successful. I studied and worked through their childhood not because I had to but because I wanted to. So now I have a successful career and a wonderful family. Was it easy? No. But they were growing up in a country where “stay at home” motherhood was culturally non-existent - and thank God! Otherwise I would be like some of my friends whose children have moved out, whose husbands are bored or cheating, and whose lives are as empty as their nests.
4
Families need to consider childcare when deciding to have kids. The benefit here is for the parents/guardians vs. the children (in most households anyway). If both parents choose to work outside the home, they need to do the math as to whether it's worth the lower-paid spouse to do so.
The government's role should be to subsidize childcare costs for less affluent households; NOT middle class or affluent households. The government should also use "carrots" (tax subsidies) and "sticks" (regulation) to minimize pay discrimination for the home-parent, as well as regulating minimum safety requirements for the children.
Childcare will always be (increasingly) expensive since it can't be off-shored (neither place utility or labor) and can't be made substantially more productive... at least until we use robotic workers which I don't think most families expect.
7
@Apathycrat
"If both parents choose to work outside": for too many, it is not a choice, just a necessity; they have to pay the rent and eat a couple of times every day.
7
@Fran : For too many Americans, even the third job is not a choice.
To be honest, I am not a big fan of any candidates, or previous candidates, universal child care plan. Including the candidate I support, Bernie Sanders.
Anything that incentivizes more breeding is a bad idea. How can you claim to be an environmentalist and want to seriously address climate change when promoting plans to make it easier for people to add more people to an already over stressed planet?
Just goes to show that there is no such thing as a perfect candidate.
Stop the breeding. Save the planet.
23
@Concernicus
Sure, but theres no way to discourage having more children that doesn’t hurt the children of the poor. Not moral, in my opinion.
My understanding is that the single best way to reduce unwanted children is to provide equal right and education—that is: opportunity—to women. As an aside, I also think my personal plan of taxing any wealth transfer (inheritance) above 10x median income at 99% would both stop immoral generational wealth transfer (children of the rich getting something for nothing) and provide funding for truly equal education for all kids.
Everyone knows there are too many people, but the china model is wrong, and just letting them starve or grow up uneducated is wrong. Let’s try giving people an alternative to having many children—many will take it. Not all, but enough.
5
Sure there is. It’s called universal access to effective birth control no matter your economic status. Some would choose not to participate but many would.
7
Wheres Trumps? People who would love to save the world this election are saying we need to beat Trump first. Can anything be done if we don't beat Trump flip The Senate and keep The House? People who voted last Tuesday get it. They get that grand plans and policies are going nowhere if we don't beat Trump and Flip the Senate. If Trump wins again he will get probably two more Supreme Court nominations.
5
You can criticize Bernie or Elizabeth for being too progressive, but I could not name anything that Biden is putting forward (except "better" ACA whatever that is).
It feels almost republican to have no platform yourself and endlessly criticize others.
68
@Paul
If voting was compulsory in the U.S. like it is in Australia the outcomes of our primaries/elections would be far different. Hopefully some day the right to vote will be implemented and not suppressed as it is now.
10
@Paul : Exactly. It seems Joe Biden's plan to restore ACA to what it was before Trump took office. It was a mess then. Premiums were spiraling out of control because the only people on the plans were those who weren't healthy enough to work and families where all members were in the gig economy.
Subsidies weren't enough and didn't cover enough people (income cutoff too low), deductibles were too high (even with the "gold" plan and subsidies only covered people with "silver" plans), coverage was extremely limited (often the best medical centers weren't included and you may have to drive past 3-6 hospitals to find one that was covered). If you moved to a new state in the middle of a calendar year, your deductible reset. You can't get coverage out of state. The list goes on.
But Biden thinks it's his shining achievement and wants to "restore" it to its former glory.
14
I have a better idea than having a "universal child plan." If you can't afford to have a child and take care of it.... don't have one. Because I have chosen not to, I don't want to be taxed any more than I am to fulfill YOUR responsibility.
20
@Roy
Problem is, those kids deserve better. The adults, not so much, but how do you punish (or not reward) irresposible parents without hurting the kids. I have no kids but I’m ok with my taxes going to primary education.
My problem is that primary education is locally funded and thus unequally provided. All kids deserve an equal start in life, if not an equal end. That is: equal opportunity, but not guaranteed equal results.
Taxing wealth transfers (inheritance) above some multiple of median income (10x?) at 99% would provide incentives to children of the rich to work as hard as children of working people, while providing them all with an equal start. A side benefit is that you cut out a heck of a lot of income/property taxes if you just take that money upon death. Zero double taxation. You get what you earn, but do not get something you did not earn from your mommy and daddy.
2
@Roy :
Only a man could write this. That is a big part of many of our society's problems.
2
@Roy
But if you get sick and/or disabled, you will gladly accept, or even demand, all the government assistance you can get; or will you "choose" to sit it out in the street, waiting for death?
2
Here in Quebec where 70% of new doctors have been females for the last decade childcare is a right for everyone. Just like becoming a doctor is totally merit based and ability to pay is not a consideration.
We are an invisible line away from America but it is as if we are going in totally different directions.
It seems our rights are your privileges. Our latest right in Canada is access to broadband and here in Quebec we are in the midst of codifying our freedom from religion.
15
@Montreal Moe
Thank You Canada!
Particularly like the freedom to means freedom from concept.
Unfortunately Americans are to full of themselves to look outside the box for solutions. We are too busy being the greatest country in the history of the planet along with practicing American Exceptionalism blah... blah... blah that we cannot hear a thing.
3
Warren's plan, after you get through her childhood stories about her Aunt Bee:
"My plan will guarantee high-quality child care and early education for every child in America from birth to school age. It will be free for millions of American families...Today, more than half of all Americans live in child care “deserts” — communities without an adequate number of licensed child care options..My plan supports....locally-licensed child care centers....Local communities would be in charge, but providers would be held to high national standards...Child care and preschool workers will be doing the educational work that teachers do, so they will be paid like comparable public school teachers.."
The plan is send federal money and federal 'standards" to local communities who will continue to have local control and local licensing. Then, it expects that child care 'deserts" will disappear.. and quality will rise dramatically. Doubtful. Without federal licensing, or national provider and program certification, the 'standards' followed will be local standards, not 'national', the latter winding up in a dusty manual.
If Democrats gain control of Congress and the presidency, one would hope their plans on child care would more cogent than Ms. Warren's. Right now Mr. Biden is trying to win a nomination and knock Trump out of office.
5
I believe child care and college, should be subsidized, but I don't believe it should be free. I believe we should find a way to Medicare for All or the public option as a right. Childcare was not paid for when I had children, but it is not a priority right now, be have bigger first to fry. If you can't afford children then don't have children. I waited many years to have kids, but knew that when I had them they would be looked after, not by the government, but by me.
16
Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren started to campaign when the economy was fairly good. A couple of months ago, people might have been willing to accept higher taxes in return for one or several social programs. With the coronavirus pandemic, the travel industry has already taken a big hit. In affected areas, people are unwilling to be in crowds and therefore, are unlikely to spend as much time and money at not only big events (many of which are being canceled), but malls and movie theaters. I'm already having trouble finding some non-virus-related items for sale, because they or components of them are made in China. There's no vaccine and no drug cure, and won't be for months, maybe a year or two. We are starting a global recession that will only get worse. If people are willing to pay higher taxes for anything, the priority will be health care.
1
@Frances Grimble If I may reply to myself, I would add that the more people are together in one space, the more likely it is that the virus will be transmitted. That includes children in schools and preschools. Having your kid together with other kids is not a great idea right now.
2
@Frances Grimble : People gripe about taxes with a healthcare for all plan, but consider this:
1. Those of us who are buying insurance on the exchange our paying a HUGE percentage of our income in premiums, deductibles, co-pays, and uncovered expenses. It amounts to about $35K/year for our family of 3 (two adults both working in the gig economy). That's about 35% of our income right there.
2. Those of us who work in the gig economy are paying *double* what everyone else pays for Medicare tax. That's another 2.9% of our income!
3. The New England town we moved to last year just voted to RAISE our property taxes to cover the 25% increase in healthcare costs for city workers.
4. At every level -- local, state, federal -- our current taxes are going to support cadillac healthcare plans for local, state, and federal workers, plus offer ACA subsidies, Medicaid, and a patchwork of state plans for children of modest-income families.
5. Every purchase you make from a place that offers healthcare to its employees has an imbedded cost for the astronomical cost of healthcare premiums. We had to stop shopping at the store 1/2 mile from our house because the prices are through the roof. It's a smaller food coop in a town of 8,000 and they spend $1 MILLION/year on employee healthcare premiums. No wonder we can't afford groceries.
I conservatively estimate that my family is paying 50% of it's income on healthcare for ourselves and others.
A 15% tax sounds divine.
8
I, admittedly, went into Sen Warren’s proposal looking to for criticism but find myself taken aback in the most wonderful sense. This is a beautifully laid out plan to address an important issue that is neither too costly or burdensome on our infrastructure. On examination, this plan would be relatively inexpensive and would hugely level the playing field that continues to be stacked against women in the workplace. I think this also fits naturally into Biden’s campaign promises built on considered progress and a tenet fundamental decency.
Warren’s pitch: an endorsement of a man in exchange for an endorsement for all women.
10
Unless Biden miss-calculates badly and picks a running mate akin to the choice that John McCain made when he picked Palin, he pretty much has the nomination locked up. Trump has no apparent plans to do much of anything in the area of social spending unless Ivanka gets his ear and he concocts some sort of Potemkin Village proposal, so why kneecap Biden by putting him on the spot over an issue that he can't prioritize or plan for until he assumes office and gets to see how big a mess has been left for him, and what he has to work with. Alternatively, he could announce support for an expenseive Warren type proposal right now, and watch the vehicle to implement it disappear when down ballot seats start to be lost.
3
@Kevin
Does a candidate have to pick a running mate even before being nomination?
Where's Trump's Universal Child Care Plan??? This is the problem with Democrats. We set our own expectations so high on what we demand of ourselves but we don't even condemn Republicans for doing NOTHING for health care even when they work so passionately to repeal and de-fund the only affordable healthcare millions of Americans currently have. Let's start asking Republicans, "why don't you want Americans, including your Republican constituents, to have affordable health care?" And while we're at it, let's ask them, "where's your Universal Child Care Plan?"
81
@David So many of Trump's positions (or lack thereof) are anti-family. Health care. Child care. Tax burdens (after beneficial provisions sunset). Family separation to the point of intentional cruelty and immigration.
Support of families would be a worthy theme for Biden and his party this year.
9
@maeve
Indeed, and history has shown we can trust a Democratic Administration to address these holes in the fabric of our health care system. But we ought not demand they have plans enumerated to the nth degree for their opponents, both Democrat and Republican, to parse ad nauseam. Plus, child care coverage is included in the ACA that Biden helped pass into law. The same ACA being actively de-funded by Republicans.
5
@David No, the ACA has nothing at all to do with child care
2
This, and the entire chid and youth-centered program from birth through vocational or college, is where I personally hope Warren plants her crowbar and leverages some policy change out of Biden. Programs to solve the student loan crisis, make universal child care and pre-K education available, improve K-12 public education starting with less testing, smaller classes and better teacher pay, vocational training for a green economy, and making public universities affordable again are all popular and we Boomers owe it to the younger generations to give them at least the same chances of success we had. We can't change his entire program but this area is fundamental, along with the tax restructuring to pay for it.
4
@Yojimbo I would suggest that in addition to the Green New Deal, the focus be on working people of all ages and all jobs getting paid more. So they can pay for their own lifestyles, including any children they may have, and college educations for their children or themselves.
7
@Frances Grimble
Bingo. Most people don’t know this but rents have actually essentially tracked inflation for the past few decades. The problem with rent affordability is that *incomes* have not tracked inflation. Incomes are way below inflation because corps have taken all the additional productivity of the American worker and funneled it into stock market returns.
Higher incomes would solve a lot of the ills that bernie and warren id, without the socialist grab of private industry and property.
4
@J c
Socialist grab?
In the same sentence the author states that Biden supports child-care subsidies today, then takes him to task for not having the same perspective 40 years ago. She goes on to suggest he needs to find a way to disavow his apparently disavowed decades-old policy. I'm sure I must be missing something.
6
One reason I don't want to support free childcare is this. New York Times articles frequently discuss free childcare. And in the comments, I very seldom see single parents desperately trying to feed themselves and their children on minimum-wage income. Most comments are by affluent, two-income parents with combined incomes of over six figures, who chose to live in expensive cities such as New York, Boston, or San Francisco (where I lived until a few years ago). Parents who say they are already paying for daycare but it's just so expensive and they want free daycare, conducted by experts in child development who can impart real education. For *their* kids. Oh, they don't mind if minimum-wage single parents get free daycare as long as they get it too, yet they are hardly in the worst need. It's hard to have any sympathy.
13
@Frances Grimble
Uh, not a lot of struggling single parents read, let alone subscribe to the NYT and have time to read and write comments. Have you never heard of sample bias? We commenters are in a bubble, which is fine as long as we are aware of it.
Joe Biden is the old person's candidate. He doesn't need to elucidate his child care plans, as most of Biden's voting base aged out of needing child care 25+ years ago.
Electing President Biden will further alienate the majority of voters under 50. Neither political party seems to understand that with every passing Presidential cycle, the "under-50s" soon become the "under-54s", then the "under-58s", and sooner or later the majority of the population will be alienated, angry, and will gravitate to Sanders-type democratic socialism.
You can't keep pandering to Boomers forever.
It's maddening that the future of this country is being largely determined by people whose own futures will be relatively short. It's even more maddening that the under-50s in this country don't see the need to take charge of their own destiny by actually voting.
21
@Dave Hitchins Joe Biden isn't Trump. That's good enough for me.
@Dave Hitchins So you'd prefer Trump's childcare plan?
@Dave Hitchins How, exactly, do you know that everyone who supports Biden is a Boomer?
The only plan Biden has is to be elected. Everything else is coming...eventually. In other words, no.
"President Franklin Roosevelt funneled funding from a wartime infrastructure bill to creating and running a network of child care centers. They cost about $10 a day in today’s dollars for 12 hours of care year round, and the quality was high. They attracted qualified, trained teachers and had low child-to-teacher ratios."
This was under a Progressive President and administration and possible under Sanders, but roundly rejected by a fearful Biden and Democratic establishment voter. Apparently this includes, according to polls, all sorts of educated women in the 'burbs who went all in for Biden. Go figure.
In Biden's worldview, get a sister to come and take care of your children until he married again. If it was good for him its good enough for America.
66
What were the WW2 era childcare workers paid? What was their education level and training? What were the facilities and enrichment activities? Any modern day Universal Childcare benefit would be much more expensive. Parents nowadays expect more. High quality childcare is expensive because the workers often live in expensive cities and have degrees.
Are we ready to impose a Value Added Tax as they do in Europe to help subsidize it and other social welfare programs. And will affluent professionals be required to pay much higher fees than the working poor. I’m dubious of just free childcare, because it heavily benefits affluent professionals. College debt cancellation is a similarly non-progressive policy, because it benefits people who have higher earnings ability - but is subsidized by everyone else - including working class people without degrees.
2
How about k-12? We’re lagging the developed world and have horrifying inequality across districts. Teachers are paid poverty wages nearly everywhere. To me this is a better investment in the future than nearly all the progressive ‘plans’ out there, including this one.
12
Universal child care is absolutely essential. Unfortunately, it doesn't poll high enough to warrant attention from politicians. From a fairly recent survey, 72% of Americans aged 50 and older are opposed to it. The Republicans are dead set against it.
It's actually kind of mind boggling that taking care of little kids is so unpopular among so many voters. We are now spending over $700 billion a year on the war machine, but we can't have day long preschool. We claim to be pro life and pro family but we have a world where both parents have to work to make ends meet and most are still flat broke. Childcare, healthcare and schooling is so expensive, I don't see how families can get by on $100,000 a year and I'm not taking about living in expensive New York real estate. Median individual income is around $32,000 and median household income is around $63,000. Daycare can easily exceed $1000 per month per child. You just can't get there from here on $63,000, let alone $35,000
So I guess Biden will come come out with a childcare plan when it poll highs enough to merit one. That's just the way this politics game is played but raising a child is no game.
24
@Bruce Rozenblit
The unpopularity makes a certain amount of sense, given that some of these middle-aged voters went nearly broke themselves paying for child care a decade or two ago. Now that their kids are older and their incomes are finally a bit higher, they are being asked to pay for the next generation.
"I had it tough so you should too" is not a great argument, but it's certainly understandable.
14
@Bruce as a lifelong preschool educator myself I have to remind you that most of the time the teachers at the school are making far less salaries than the parents. They too have families, rent, mortgages, cars etc to pay for. Many don’t have health insurance, retirement is a joke. As a caretaker whose values are community, it still gets tiresome with all the focus on families, not on the caregivers. And by the way all day care is hard on the children. 
8
@Carl H
No, its not understandable. Not at all, unless spite and pique figure high on your list of social attributes leading to well-being.
Its past time to silence prissy souls who argue, for example, that providing quality free or inexpensive college would not be fair because they had to wait tables or take loans.
Or those who eagerly withhold healthcare and health itself because they had to pay for theirs.
What part of "everybody does better when everybody does better" do these people not get?
What part of "here's a trillion dollars for rich guys, with more to come later, after we trim social benefits below the survival level" do they think benefits them or their country?
NYT today features commentary pleading for collective consciousness of the costs of too-enthusiastic pursuit of personal pleasures such as travel, camping in sensitive environments, driving.
They lost their case as soon as they uttered the word "collective".
This is America, baby. Our awareness stops at "I got mine..."
5
As a new parent living in a high cost of living area (greater Boston), I have no idea how you raise a child, let alone children, unless you are in a two-parent household and comfortably upper middle class or have reliable free help from family. The funds required for day care -- in at least about $500 per week per child -- are as much as rent, which universal day care will help solve. The other issue is that a working parent requires an understanding employer for those occasions when a parent needs to to take a child to the doctor or stay home with a sick child. I can't imagine how a single parent with young children gets by, or even a two-parent household in which the breadwinner is an hourly worker or shift worker. To completely address the problem of raising children today, more than just cheaper childcare is needed.
52
@hoyermatt you mean you don’t look at raising children like my spoiled brother looks at it? Just expecting the grandparents to pay for everything and drop what they’re doing anytime a grandchild is sick or mom (who doesn’t work) has to get her nails done? Ok I’m dripping sarcasm, but this is how so many people in my neck of the woods do it. They have kids simply because everybody else is having kids. Most of the people I know don’t even want to be parents, let alone take parenting seriously. And the grandparents apparently feel too guilty to say no when the kids dump the grandkids off with them without so much as asking. I would never do my parents ther way, but trust me, it’s a thing with Southern people of my generation. They have kids to fit in, all about image, regardless of whether or not they can afford them. Then, they dump them off with the grandparents most of the time, but you’d never know it by their picture-perfect Facebook pages.
Seriously, parenthood has so many different meanings these days. I’ll wager that Massachusetts, with its higher education level, has more mature people becoming parents. In the South, we have 60-somethings walking around who act 14. It’s really no wonder we are consistently ranked in the bottom in public education and every other category involving children. Good parenting requires maturity, and a universal childcare program would certainly help mature parents care for their kids. Good luck getting the South on board with such a plan.
6
@hoyermatt But you chose to live in an expensive area and you chose to have children. And apparently, you can already afford daycare. Why should everyone else add to the income of the comfortably off by sparing them daycare expenses?
4
Nothing would change under Biden. Not real, lasting, fundamental change anyway. Warren was never going to get elected. Now her ideas will die along with her candidacy, as she, up to now, has refused to endorse the only ideologically similar candidate in the field. Maybe, for Warren, it was never about progress in the first place.
15
I find it quite interesting that people shudder at the prospect of a Progressive becoming president. They claim a Centrist is preferable, but in the very next breath validate the Progressives' case by lamenting the Centrists' history of simply adopting the Republicans' framing, vocabulary and advocacy for every important issue. What gives?
Candidate Biden is an illustrative example. In today's submission Bryce Covert laments Mr. Biden's adoption, refinement and articulation of President Nixon's very toxic language regarding child care. Other examples from Mr. Biden can also be found, for instance, his voting to make it impossible in law to discharge student debt; his support of the "war-on-drugs", etc.
It's not that I am advocating here for Sanders' candidacy, but to me it isn't easy to say Mr. Biden has "moved left" given his history, and a politician's ability to say anything he thinks you want to hear in order to get what he wants. It looks to me like Progressives have a further extension to their wait for progress.
46
@Robbie J.
You do know that you cannot get elected president, no matter who you are or how great you are... just from Democrat voters.. right? If not, then you need a sincere reality check.
FACT: you need to appeal to independents and moderate Democrats, to win the presidency. Much of this demographic so key to winning, believe Sanders, and in particular Sanders approach to politics is simply one bridge too far for now.
What is imperative right now, over everything else, is to restore a foundation of decency and trust in the seat of president of the United States. That foundation, once restored will lay the groundwork for more progressive policy moves in the future. Sad to say, but the nation is in a crisis and needs some real political triage back to stability right now... not a revolution.
2
We need reports on how child care operates in other civilzed countries. They also have long standing HC for all, and laws mandating paid sick leave for all. It's centrist and accepted, not radical.
How do they finance it?
How much public supprt does it have?
How long have they had it?
Why aren't their govts blocked from it as they are here?
We need concrete, real-people examples.
Govt action to serve the public interest is not politically fashionable in US politics. The rw blocks it, and the centrist are weak in fighting for it. We the People lose out.
Article in US News-
"Child Care Laggard
The U.S. can accelerate its own progress on child care policy by looking at the rest of the world."
5
@Meredith
We have that information. Have had for half a century.
What we don't have is the will or the wisdom to implement it in the face of rampant greed and self-adoration.
10
@John .... you may have that information, but most Americans don't. Our media keeps it dark--never on TV news, and rarely in NYT. Politicians are cautious for reform. That's why US voters put up with rampant greed--- disguised as protecting American 'Freedom'.
1
Universal child care plans must be an integral part of any democratic candidate worth his name and character. But it behooves us, the people, to demand it. If this is a democracy worth it's name, we the people ought to tell the new administration what is in our best interests. And child care must remain pre-eminent. Of course, it demands that the current economic inequality be tackled with vigor, and infuse this capitalistic system with ethics. It's about time to shelve greed and selfishness, before it destroys us.
3
In 2016 this country faced 1 existential crisis , climate change. In 2020 we have 2: climate change and Trump. These are problems that have to addressed today, not tomorrow, not next month, not 2 years from now. If we do not then the nation is at risk of being mortally wounded. Universal child care is a serious problem that needs to be addressed but it is NOT an existential problem. We want our candidates to be able to prioritize problems and focus on the most important.
51
Democrats need to give up their fixation with plans.
Spending months arguing about which liberal fantasy would be ideal is completely pointless in the face of reality—a.k.a. Congress and the courts.
Joe Biden would probably move childcare in a slightly better direction. At least, I doubt he would make it worse.
Beyond that, what he wants isn't worth worrying about.
78
@Seb It's not worth woryying about plans for the future if you're already comfortable, own a house, and have a good job with a pension. But for the majority of Americans who are locked out of the middle class, it matters. Americans deserve better than a restoration of the past.
We need courageous leadership like FDR to re-create a pathway to the middle class. A Democratic victory that doesn't result in significant progrss over 4 years will result in a resurgent Trumpism in 2024 that will face a cynical generation unwilling to support a party that didn't take their needs seriously.
16
@Kraig I love FDr but he had a big Democratic majority in Congress, as did LBJ in the 1960s. With today’s divided Congress and a Republican side that is set on stonewalling any new laws, the best we can hope for is incremental progress. Also, any new big new programs, if they miraculously passed, would face continual challenge in court, like Obamacare, and under today’s conservative court might well be overturned. If Social Security were being proposed today, it would never make it.
2
@Seb ..... Slightly better. Better than GOP/DT. That's it.
Democrats fixation with plans? The GOP and their allied donors sure have their plans--well organized--to keep things privatized. To prevent collective govt action in the public interest. Re child care, HC, paid sick leave, all the benefits that are centrist in other nations.
How hard do our standard Democrats fight back? It's unfashionable. They'll be called ugly names, as if they're unAmerican.
4
It is trite to say that Children are our future and lots of politicians say it, but it is about time we put our money where our mouth is and not only supply excellent pre K for our children, but up grade all of our educational standards, better pay for all teachers including those working in pre K and bonuses for exceptional teachers. Everyone benefits from this but especially our employers who will get top grade employees down the line. So a special tax on corporations for this purpose would be right in line. After all it is their employees who worry about their children and their current employees will be freed from this burden. Its not my problem is not a good response from those without children.
4
It's time for real change. Bernie Sanders is the first step. It will take time to implement his ideas. It takes courage. Be the change. Get on board.
109
@Isobel
Nope.. Sanders in the office of president will be 4 years of lame duck presidency.
Why? because Sanders at the top of the ticket will ensure Democrats do NOT take back the Senate, and key seats at the state levels will be derailed under Sanders at the top of the ticket.
As such... Sanders can have all the grand plans he likes, but there will be insufficient political support at federal and state levels to actually get any of it implemented.
No... getting on board the Sanders ship is a trip to nowhere... and clearly voters in a majority have concluded the same thing on Super Tuesday. Worse, Michigan is now at risk for Sanders, and if he can't win Michigan.... the Sanders campaign is toast.
5
Predictably now the hit pieces at the NYT will ramp up against the male candidates as feminists driven by misandry and scorn over Warren and their incessant hostility toward men fester their self inflicted wounds.
For generations America's child care plan, heartily endorsed by the majority of women, was for men to toil in economic exploitation in their roles as breadwinners while women made most of the choices about what their role would be. Surveys by Pew among others indicate that still prevails. I expect that to largely continue given it is more or less universally what women have preferred, whether Joe Biden approves or not.
2