Slawik Announces Child Care Affordability Act
The bill would eliminate the waiting list for child care assistance and restore cuts to child care providers made in the 2011 budget agreement.
Photos
Rep. Nora Slawik announced introduction of the Child Care Affordability Act Tuesday in the home of a St. Paul day care provider.
“How can we look at funding the Vikings stadium for $300 million and we can’t find the money for kids down at the Capitol?” said Slawik (DFL-Maplewood). “We need to make sure there’s high quality, affordable childcare.”
The bill, HF2219, would restore the 2.5 percent rate cut made to subsidized child care providers in the 2011 legislative session and eliminate the waiting list for child care assistance, which is now 7,000 families long, Slawik said.
Child care provider Sharon Born, of Waseca, said she’s had to start working evenings and weekends to make up for the money she lost due to the child care assistance cuts. Despite the hardship, she said her primary concern is what’s happening to the children in the 7,000 families on the waiting list for assistance.
“Who’s watching these kids?” Born said. “My experience is a lot of these kids are not safe.”
The reforms set forth in the bill—which also include reinstating funding for professional development of child care providers—wouldn’t come cheap. Its estimated cost would be between $300 million and $500 million, which Slawik noted, is about the same as the proposed state contribution toward the Vikings stadium.
“There’s a cost to taking care of kids,” Slawik said. “I think kids should be the priority in this state.”
Sen. Mary Jo McGuire (DFL-Falcon Heights) authored the Senate version of the bill.
Eric Ekstrand
9:44 pm on Thursday, February 16, 2012
Since no one else has questioned this since it is related "the children" i will and receive the attacks that will soon follow. Is the $300 million that she is noting a one-time cost or every year. Bet it is yearly, which means her comparison is flawed. If the childcare support was a one-time cost than she could make this statement but since it is not, than she is off the mark. The stadium funding would be a one time cost, and would theoretically be paid back via construction and long term jobs.
There is a cost to taking care of kids, such as not having taxes and cost of living being so high that parents have to choose between food and paying taxes or staying home with their kids and raising them themselves. Or, the situations where there is a single parent with no family support, no 2nd parent, and low income due to unplanned pregnancy! These programs are good, but to use the comparison she uses is wrong, and should be more of a comparison to all the money we spend on DNR projects that have no financial gain other than making us all feel good about ourselves.
Markus
12:47 pm on Friday, February 17, 2012
The question no one ever brings up. Why is it the state's responsibility to ensure there is high quality, affordable child care? How about the parents assume the responsibility for their children?
I agree that we shouldn't even be considering funding a Stadium for billionaires, but that is a straw-man argument. Eric made a good point. If we weren't already overtaxed and over regulated by the very people who want to "help" us, subsidized daycare would be much less of an issue. Let people keep more of their money and they wouldn't need the state to recycle their tax payments back to them in the form of subsidies. Less people on the dole would should be the goal, not more.
If the people who choose to have children were required to have a modicum of personal responsibility regarding their actions and subsequent consequences, and then get government out of the business of sticking their nose into the daycare industry we could allow the marketplace to solve the problems. I know market economic philosophy is anathema to liberals, but it works. Try it sometime.
Sharon Born, of Waseca laments that she has to work more because of cuts, but her primary concern is the children. That is the biggest load of hooey I've ever heard. It's doubtful her primary concern is the children, it's more likely about the money. It's always about the money. I don't care if it's a school levy request or subsidized daycare, follow the money and you'll find the motivation.