Raising children should be affordable: Beyond the baby steps of Reiner, Newsom

The crushing cost of raising children troubles not only parents, it suddenly preoccupies political leaders as well. New York’s new mayor, Zohran Mamdani, seeks $6 billion to ensure free child care, starting with newborns. JD Vance pitches a higher child tax credit, while imploring women to simply bear more children.

But after a half-century of policy forays, parents still confront a dizzying maze of child care options, including paid child minders and pre-K’s of varying quality. The price of care – exceeding $19,000 per child in Los Angeles – amplifies loud pleas for affordability. And with tepid progress, the nation’s birthrate just keeps falling.

Children’s access to pre-K has inched upward among 4-year-olds, thanks to decades of advocacy by the likes of Rob Reiner and Hillary Clinton, along with steady work by moderate Republican governors. 

Yet, costly initiatives keep falling short, dashing the child-rearing hopes of young families. Gov. Gavin Newsom has spent billions to open pre-K classrooms solely in public schools, only to kill-off neighborhood centers that compete for the same children. When New York boldly expanded free preschool a decade ago, classroom quality climbed mostly in better-off neighborhoods, failing to lift poor children.

Civic leaders could finally deliver if they took stock of lessons learned — building on what’s worked and avoiding costly mistakes — to ease family budgets and expand options that truly lift toddlers and preschoolers.

Prioritize parenting over working. Progressives like New York’s Mamdani seek free child care starting at six weeks of age. But research backs conservative advocates who weigh parenting over quickly returning to work after a newborn arrives.

Sure, the MAGA-right insists it’s mothers who must stay home. But setting aside this Leave It to Beaver reminiscence, consistent findings reveal that babies best thrive when securely attached to a parent, whether the mother or father. Longer periods of paid leave appear to yield stronger gains for infants, rather than relying on paid babysitters of uneven quality.

Public vouchers already cover many babies and toddlers in California, a Republican reform dating back to 1990. Why not make parents equally eligible for these chits in the baby’s first year of life? This would borrow from Norway, a nation that provides 12 months of paid leave split evenly between parents, ensuring that women’s careers are not hampered by taking leave.

Lowering prices does not ensure quality. Even democratic-socialists like Mamdani justify child care funding in economic terms – rushing parents back to jobs, assuring employers of a stable workforce. But are we investing in child care to boost the GDP, or to nurture more robust children?

Yes, easing child care bills remains urgent. But it will not always enrich children’s early growth. In California, one’s boyfriend – if boasting no criminal record – can earn a $16,000 voucher to care for a newborn. Newsom has nearly tripled the count of vouchers to finance this mixed bag of caregivers. But research shows that, beyond trust and familiarity, informal child minders yield slight gains in child development.

When New York delivered free pre-K a decade ago, the city enriched classroom activities and retained strong teachers by raising salaries. But the quality of observed classrooms climbed most in those serving White and Asian-heritage kids; programs hosting Black and Latino children lagged behind.

Entitlements are not always fair. Progressives yearn for universal preschool, a dream floating across the Atlantic from Scandinavia. So, politicians spotlight their shiny new version of free pre-K, rather than strengthening the thick web of pre-K’s operating since the 1960s, going back to Head Start.

Newsom has succeeded in opening free pre-K slots for 4-year-olds. But access has grown most rapidly in wealthier parts of southern California, threatening to reinforce, rather than narrowing, stark disparities in children’s early learning.

It takes a human-scale village. Parents do require options, given differing work schedules and cultural preferences in how to raise their children. But Newsom has done little to simplify the state’s multiple programs, or broadcast crisp information about child care options. Confusion reigns for most parents, choosing from hazy hunches over whether the lady next door or pre-K around the corner is best for one’s child.  

Policy makers could simplify this maze by opening a single door into local pre-K options, along with one voucher program that enables family leave. Why not post a half-page application online, then instantly display nearby child care openings? The city of Long Beach has already built such a user-friendly hub.

We can’t stop politicians from spotlighting what’s new, their latest stitch in a colorful quilt of mystifying options. But, together, we can streamline access for families and boost the quality of caregivers and pre-K to lift all children. 

Bruce Fuller, a sociologist at UC Berkeley, is author of Debating Childhood and Preschool (Oxford).