[House Hearing, 119 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


                      CHILD CARE AND THE AMERICAN
                   WORKFORCE: REMOVING BARRIERS TO 
                          ECONOMIC GROWTH
=======================================================================

                                HEARING

                               Before The

                     SUBCOMMITTEE ON EARLY CHILDHOOD, 
                  ELEMENTARY, AND SECONDARY EDUCATION

                                 OF THE

                  COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND WORKFORCE
                     U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                    ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS

                             FIRST SESSION

                               __________

             HEARING HELD IN WASHINGTON, DC, JUNE 24, 2025

                               __________

                           Serial No. 119-20

                               __________

    Printed for the use of the Committee on Education and Workforce
    
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]    

        Available via: edworkforce.house.gov or www.govinfo.gov
         
                               __________
                               
                   U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
62-888 PDF                WASHINGTON : 2026
=======================================================================
       
                  COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND WORKFORCE

                    TIM WALBERG, Michigan, Chairman

JOE WILSON, South Carolina           ROBERT C. ``BOBBY'' SCOTT, 
VIRGINIA FOXX, North Carolina            Virginia,
GLENN THOMPSON, Pennsylvania           Ranking Member
GLENN GROTHMAN, Wisconsin            JOE COURTNEY, Connecticut
ELISE M. STEFANIK, New York          FREDERICA S. WILSON, Florida
RICK W. ALLEN, Georgia               SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon
JAMES COMER, Kentucky                MARK TAKANO, California
BURGESS OWENS, Utah                  ALMA S. ADAMS, North Carolina
LISA C. McCLAIN, Michigan            MARK DeSAULNIER, California
MARY E. MILLER, Illinois             DONALD NORCROSS, New Jersey
JULIA LETLOW, Louisiana              LUCY McBATH, Georgia
KEVIN KILEY, California              JAHANA HAYES, Connecticut
MICHAEL A. RULLI, Ohio               ILHAN OMAR, Minnesota
JAMES C. MOYLAN, Guam                HALEY M. STEVENS, Michigan
ROBERT F. ONDER, Jr., Missouri       GREG CASAR, Texas
RYAN MACKENZIE, Pennsylvania         SUMMER L. LEE, Pennsylvania
MICHAEL BAUMGARTNER, Washington      JOHN W. MANNION, New York
MARK HARRIS, North Carolina          YASSAMIN ANSARI, Arizona
MARK B. MESSMER, Indiana
RANDY FINE, Florida

                     R.J. Laukitis, Staff Director
              Veronique Pluviose, Minority Staff Director
                                 ------                                

  SUBCOMMITTEE ON EARLY CHILDHOOD, ELEMENTARY, AND SECONDARY EDUCATION

                   KEVIN KILEY, California, Chairman

MARY E. MILLER, Illinois             SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon,
GLENN THOMPSON, Pennsylvania           Ranking Member
BURGESS OWENS, Utah                  JAHANA HAYES, Connecticut
MICHAEL A. RULLI, Ohio               SUMMER L. LEE, Pennsylvania
JAMES C. MOYLAN, Guam                JOHN W. MANNION, New York
RYAN MACKENZIE, Pennsylvania         FREDERICA S. WILSON, Florida
MARK HARRIS, North Carolina          ALMA S. ADAMS, North Carolina
MARK B. MESSMER, Indiana             YASSAMIN ANSARI, Arizona
                        
                        
                        C  O  N  T  E  N  T  S

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page

Hearing held on June 24, 2025....................................     1

                           OPENING STATEMENTS

    Kiley, Hon. Kevin, Chairman, Subcommittee on Early Childhood, 
      Elementary, and Secondary Education........................     1
        Prepared statement of....................................     3
    Bonamici, Hon. Suzanne, Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Early 
      Childhood, Elementary, and Secondary Education.............     4
        Prepared statement of....................................     6

                               WITNESSES

    Codella Low, Caitlin, Managing Director of Human Capital, 
      Bipartisan Policy Center...................................     8
        Prepared statement of....................................    11
    Barton, Todd D., Mayor, City of Crawfordsville, Indiana......    15
        Prepared statement of....................................    16
    Friedman, Dr. Ruth J., Senior Fellow, The Century Foundation.    23
        Prepared statement of....................................    25
    Sims, Celia Hartman, President and Founder, The Abecedarian 
      Group......................................................    29
        Prepared statement of....................................    32

                         ADDITIONAL SUBMISSIONS

    Ansari, Hon. Yassamin, a Representative in Congress from the 
      State of Arizona:
        Report by Marshall Plan for Moms, titled ``The Business 
          Case for Child Care--How Parent-Focused Employee Value 
          Propositions Help Companies Win the War for Talent''...    51
    Scott, Robert C. ``Bobby'', a Representative in Congress from 
      the State of Virginia:
        Report dated May 1, 2025, from americanprogress.org, 
          titled ``A Path Forward on Child Care Regulation--
          Differentiating Between Harmful Deregulation and 
          Helpful Reform''.......................................    75

                        QUESTIONS FOR THE RECORD

    Responses to questions submitted for the record by:
        Dr. Ruth Friedman........................................   102

 
                      CHILD CARE AND THE AMERICAN
            WORKFORCE: REMOVING BARRIERS TO ECONOMIC GROWTH

                              ----------                              


                         Tuesday, June 24, 2025

                  House of Representatives,
  Subcommittee on Early Childhood, Elementary, and 
                                Secondary Education
                      Committee on Education and Workforce,
                                                    Washington, DC.
    The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:19 a.m., in 
Room 2175, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Kevin Kiley 
(Chairman of the Subcommittee) presiding.
    Present: Representatives Kiley, Miller, Thompson, Owens, 
Moylan, Mackenzie, Harris, Messmer, Walberg, Bonamici, Hayes, 
Lee, Mannion, Adams, Ansari, and Scott.
    Staff present: Vlad Cerga, Director of Information 
Technology; Dara Gardner, Einstein Fellow; Wilson; Amy Raaf 
Jones, Director of Education and Human Services Policy; Libby 
Kearns, Press Assistant; Audra McGeorge, Communications 
Director; Eli Mitchell, Legislative Assistant; Alexis Morgan, 
Intern; Ethan Pann, Deputy Press Secretary and Digital 
Director; Ian Prince, Professional Staff Member; Kane Riddell, 
Staff Assistant; Carl Rifino, Intern; Brad Thomas, Deputy 
Director of Education and Human Services Policy; Ali Watson, 
Director of Member Services; James Whittaker, General Counsel; 
Sayda Bir, Minority Intern; Ilana Brunner, Minority General 
Counsel; Nichole Dumlao, Minority AIPACS Intern; Rashage Green, 
Minority Director of Education Policy & Counsel; Caroline Guo, 
Minority Intern; Alexandra Walker, Minority Intern; Vivian 
Wiggins, Minority Intern; Stephanie Lalle, Minority 
Communications Director; Raiyana Malone, Minority Press 
Secretary; Marie McGrew, Minority Press Assistant; Veronique 
Pluviose, Minority Staff Director; Banyon Vassar, Minority 
Director of IT.
    Chairman Kiley. Good morning. The Subcommittee on Early 
Childhood, Elementary, and Secondary Education will come to 
order. I note that a quorum is present. Without objection, the 
Chair is authorized to call a recess at any time.
    Child care is essential to helping working parents thrive, 
and our local economies grow. At the same time, child care can 
be exceedingly expensive, and the cost is only climbing. 
According to a 2024 data analysis by Child Care Aware of 
American, my home State of California has the third highest 
cost of infant care in the country.
    $22,628 annually for center-based care. U.S. Department of 
Labor data from 2022 demonstrates that families spend between 
8.9 and 16 percent of their median income on full-day care for 
one child. One analysis of 2024 costs found the national 
average price of care be $13,128.
    I think most parents would agree this is simply 
unsustainable. While cost is one obstacle, so is access. Using 
2019 data, the Bipartisan Policy Center calculated the first 
known estimate gap in child care, that is roughly 11 million 
children needed child care, but the national supply only 
created 7.8 million slots, creating a 31.2 percent child care 
gap.
    The child care and development block grant is the Federal 
program governing child care programs for low-income working 
families. The block grant program exists to help working 
families access affordable childcare, giving them the freedom 
to remain in the workforce, and increase their economic 
opportunity, one solution to the problem of childcare 
affordability and access.
    Choice is a pillar of the program. Giving parents the 
freedom to make both lifestyle and economic decisions that best 
meet their individual family's needs. When choice is limited, 
either circumstantially through a lot of childcare slots as 
rural areas disproportionately feel, or because grants and 
contracts are given priority over family decisionmaking.
    Those families and our economy suffer. Worker support is 
another pillar of the block grant program, with multifaceted 
economic benefits. Child care helps parents remain in the 
workforce, which meets the needs of American industry in light 
of a national workforce participation rate that is currently 
just 62.4 percent, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
    The work requirements of the block grant program also help 
parents and families grow their economic opportunity, and 
realize financial freedom, often helping low-income families 
move beyond the need for a Federal safety net and thrive 
independent of government support.
    Together, families, businesses, and our communities see 
boost to economic growth as a result. The block grant program 
is a great support for those least likely to access and afford 
child care, but it alone cannot solve the problem most parents 
in America feel.
    As I mentioned earlier, child care can be very expensive to 
provide, plain and simple. The highest standards of health, 
safety and caregiver to child ratios are necessary to provide 
for the needs of our children, and given parents peace of mind, 
but they come at a significant cost.
    There is also a threshold beyond which parents can just no 
longer afford to pay for care, which explains why some parents, 
particularly moms, have to leave the workforce to the detriment 
of our businesses, local economies and the families themselves.
    The differential between the cost of providing care, and 
what parents can afford is so vast that no one entity can 
provide all the needed resources, including the Federal 
Government. We do not have to look back too far to see clear 
proof of this. During and after the COVID pandemic, the Federal 
Government provided unprecedented funding to the child care 
sector.
    All told, pandemic-era legislation increased regular child 
care block grant funding by nearly 300 percent. While this 
additional Federal spending of taxpayer dollars may have kept 
childcare providers open, it actually seemed to have done 
little to address the affordability and sustainability of the 
childcare market.
    Costs to families are still exorbitant. Providers are 
fighting for their needed workforce, a significant care gap 
remains, and employers see the affect a lack of childcare has 
on their business. The only reasonable approach to addressing 
the affordability and sustainability challenges facing the 
childcare sector is through public-private partnership.
    Many examples exist throughout the country, and today we 
are privileged to hear testimony from policy experts and State 
leaders who are tackling this economic challenge head on. From 
statewide initiatives to local investments, to much needed 
policy reforms. We can inform and encourage our communities to 
think creatively about modernizing our childcare sector for 
affordable and sustainable solutions.
    With that, I yield to the Ranking Member for an opening 
statement.
    [The prepared statement of Chairman Kiley follows:]

    Statement of Hon. Kevin Kiley, Chairman, Subcommittee on Early 
             Childhood, Elementary, and Secondary Education

    Child care is essential to helping working parents thrive and our 
local economies grow.
    At the same time, child care can be exceedingly expensive, and the 
cost is only climbing.
    According to a 2024 data analysis by Child Care Aware of America, 
my home state of California has the third highest cost of infant care 
in the country--$22,628 annually for center-based care.
    U.S. Department of Labor data from 2022 demonstrates that families 
spend between 8.9 and 16 percent of their median income on full-day 
care for one child. One analysis of 2024 costs found the national 
average price of care to be $13,128.
    I think most parents would agree this is simply unsustainable.
    While cost is one obstacle, so is access. Using 2019 data, the 
Bipartisan Policy Center calculated the first known estimate of the 
national gap in child care: roughly 11 million children needed child 
care but the national supply only created 7.8 million slots, creating a 
31.2 percent child care gap.
    The Child Care and Development Block Grant is the federal program 
governing child care programs for low-income working families. The 
block grant program exists to help working parents access affordable 
child care, giving them the freedom to remain in the workforce and 
increase their economic opportunity--one solution to the problem of 
child care affordability and access.
    Choice is a pillar of the program, giving parents the freedom to 
make both lifestyle and economic decisions that best meet their 
individual family's needs. When choice is limited--either 
circumstantially through a lack of child care slots, as rural areas 
disproportionately feel, or because grants and contracts are given 
priority over family decision making-those families and our economy 
suffer.
    Worker support is another pillar of the block grant program, with 
multifaceted economic benefit. Child care helps parents remain in the 
workforce, which meets the needs of American industry in light of a 
national workforce participation rate that is currently just 62.4 
percent according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The work 
requirements of the block grant program also help parents and families 
grow their economic opportunity and realize financial freedom, often 
helping low-income families move beyond the need for a federal safety 
net and thrive independent of government support. Together, families, 
businesses, and our communities see boosted economic growth as a 
result. The block grant program is a great support for those least 
likely to access and afford child care, but it alone cannot solve the 
problem most parents in America feel.
    As I mentioned earlier, child care can be very expensive to 
provide--plain and simple. The high standards in health, safety, and 
caregiver to child ratios are necessary to provide for the needs of our 
children and give parents peace of mind but they come at a significant 
cost. There is also a threshold beyond which parents can no longer 
afford to pay for care, which explains why some parents--particularly 
moms--have to leave the workforce, to the detriment of businesses, 
local economies, and families.
    The differential between the cost of providing care and what 
parents can afford is so vast that no one entity can provide all the 
needed resources, including the federal government. We do not have to 
look back too far to see proof of this. During and after the COVID 
pandemic, the federal government provided unprecedented funding to the 
child care sector. All told, pandemic-era legislation increased regular 
child care block grant funding by nearly 300 percent. While this 
additional federal spending of taxpayer dollars may have kept child 
care providers open, it seems to have done little to address the 
affordability and sustainability of the child care market. Costs to 
families are still exorbitant, providers are fighting for their needed 
workforce, a significant care gap remains, and employers see the effect 
a lack of child care has on their business.
    The only reasonable approach to addressing the affordability and 
sustainability of the child care sector is through public-private 
partnership. Many examples exist throughout the country. Today we are 
privileged to hear testimony from policy experts and state leaders who 
are tackling this economic conundrum head on. From statewide 
initiatives, to local investments, to much needed policy reforms, we 
can inform and encourage our communities to think creatively about 
modernizing our child care sector toward affordable and sustainable 
solutions.
                                 ______
                                 
    Ms. Bonamici. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to the 
witnesses for being here today and bringing your expertise and 
experience. For years I have heard from parents with young 
children that have reliable childcare, that having reliable 
childcare makes all other work possible.
    A majority of families with children under the age of 6 
need some form of childcare, and in most households all of the 
adults are working. In fact, all available parents are in the 
workforce for about 69 percent of children under the age of 6, 
and of course when kids get older, they still need before and 
after school care, and extended learning opportunities, or they 
will have the gaps that really challenge families as well.
    Despite this overwhelming need, childcare remains both 
expensive and scarce. It is something every witness here today 
included in their testimony, and in today's economy parents 
must all often juggle multiple responsibilities to make ends 
meet. Too many families today are struggling with higher prices 
at the grocery store, skyrocketing costs for healthcare and 
housing. Childcare is a necessity for the majority of American 
families with children, and in many places across the country 
it's more expensive than housing or in-State college tuition.
    This forces families to make impossible choices. Do they 
pay for rent, utilities, food and healthcare, or do they pay 
for childcare? In too many cases families settle for lower 
quality care, or may decide to leave the workforce entirely, 
jeopardizing their financial stability and future opportunities 
for their children.
    This issue is especially acute in my home State of Oregon 
where the hurdles are both supply and affordability. I speak 
with many Oregonians, often women, who are limited by the lack 
of access to childcare, but it is not just women, it is 
families and it is the business community as well.
    Earlier this year, I held a town hall meeting in 
Clatskanie, which is a rural city about 1,700 people, very 
rural, where the Head Start Center is the only childcare 
available in the entire city. On Oregon's coast, the limited 
options for childcare prevent the coastal towns from expanding 
and thriving when families have to turn down jobs there because 
there is no childcare available.
    The Oregon legislature created a childcare infrastructure 
fund in 2023 to help expand childcare options, but the funding 
is just a drop in the bucket compared to what is truly needed 
to meet the demand. The lack of affordable care limits 
opportunities, creates stress for families, and also holds back 
the economy. Childcare challenges for parents and caregivers 
and the workforce cost the economy an estimated 122 billion 
dollars each year in lost earnings, productivity and revenue.
    Oregon alone loses about 1.4 billion dollars each year. 
These numbers reflect the missed economic potential, as 
parents, and particularly mothers, are forced to leave their 
jobs or reduce their working hours. When parents cannot work 
because they do not have reliable childcare, businesses lose 
skilled workers and the economy suffers.
    Despite the high cost of childcare, care providers are also 
struggling. The early care and education workforce is 
overwhelmingly composed of women, particularly women of color. 
Childcare workers are among the lowest paid sectors, and many 
childcare providers have little or no access to other workplace 
benefits like healthcare.
    It is unacceptable that the people who are caring for our 
Nation's youngest barely make a living wage, and have stability 
in their own lives. I have spoken with childcare workers who 
cannot afford childcare for their own children. The childcare 
workforce is essential to our society, yet their compensation 
does not reflect the importance of their work.
    As Dr. Friedman included in her testimony, the root of the 
childcare crisis is that we are relying on the private market 
to solve a problem it cannot. I know the Chairman mentioned 
public private partnerships, and that is going to be part of 
the testimony today. That might work in some communities, but 
there are many communities in Oregon and across the country 
where they do not have the ability or resources to do that.
    Without bold and sustained Federal investment, childcare 
costs will continue to rise, and the workforce that provides 
the care will continue to struggle. We know that investing in 
childcare helps address the needs of children, families and 
providers, and we also know that it is a good investment.
    Thank you, Ms. Codella Low, who you wrote in your testimony 
that for every one dollar invested in early childhood programs, 
the return is up to $17.00 in reduced need for public 
assistance, increased earnings, better educational outcomes. We 
know these programs work, yet we still struggle to fund them.
    I am grateful that solving the childcare crisis is a 
bipartisan issue. Democrats and Republicans alike understand 
the importance of caring for our Nation's children.
    We have bipartisan support for a 12.4-billion-dollar 
investment in the childcare development block grant. I have 
been working for years on a bipartisan basis. I do not know if 
Ms. Stefanick is here yet, we started working on the child and 
adult care food program years ago to streamline it and to 
update it.
    I do need to point out that many of the policies that my 
colleagues in the majority are still supporting will make life 
harder, including policies in the Big, Ugly, Bill that will cut 
crucial programs like SNAP and Medicaid. These are programs 
that support children, family, childcare centers, and the 
childcare workforce. Thousands, millions of children in this 
country get their health benefits from Medicaid and rely on 
SNAP.
    Let us acknowledge that hurdles to fully fund childcare 
limits economic growth threatens employers and small 
businesses. It hurts working families and the early educator 
workforce, and because the early years are so critical to 
development, it hinders the ability of children to meet their 
full potential. Again, it is a good investment to invest in 
early childhood education.
    It is undeniable that care is necessary for parents and the 
economy and the workforce, but it is also important for 
children. Quality childcare means not just having a place to 
park your kids during the day so you can go to work. Childcare 
is early learning and social and emotional development. It sets 
kids up for success for the rest of their lives.
    Frankly, childcare is the best investment we can make in 
our future. We should invest in childcare. We have the 
Childcare for Working Families Act, and that would cap the cost 
of childcare at 7 percent of income, making it affordable for 
all parents, and also provide historic investments in the 
childcare workforce, including higher paid, better benefits and 
improved training opportunities.
    This workforce is critical to doing the important work. 
Again, investing in child care is an investment in our Nation's 
future. We can and must enact policies that make childcare 
accessible, affordable and high-quality for every family. The 
cost of inaction is great, and families,workers, andthe economy 
cannot wait any longer.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I look forward to the discussion 
and I yield back.
    [The prepared statement of Ranking Member Bonamici 
follows:]

  Statement of Hon. Suzanne Bonamici, Ranking Member, Subcommittee on 
          Early Childhood, Elementary, and Secondary Education

    Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to the witnesses for 
bringing your expertise and experience.
    For years, I have heard from parents with young children that 
having reliable child care makes all other work possible. A majority of 
families with children under the age of six need some form of child 
care, and in most households, all the adults are working. In fact, all 
available parents are in the workforce for 69 percent of children under 
age six. Of course, when kids get older, they need before and after 
school care and extended learning opportunities, or they will have the 
gaps that really challenge families as well.
    Despite this overwhelming need, child care remains both expensive 
and scarce; it is something every witness here today included in their 
testimony. In today's economy, parents must often juggle multiple 
responsibilities to make ends meet. Too many families today struggle 
with higher prices at the grocery store and skyrocketing costs for 
healthcare and housing. Child care is a necessity for the majority of 
American families, and in many places across the country, it is more 
expensive than housing or in-state college tuition.
    This forces families to make impossible choices; do they pay for 
rent, utilities, food, and healthcare, or do they pay for child care? 
In too many cases, families settle for lower-quality care or may decide 
to leave the workforce entirely, jeopardizing their financial stability 
and future opportunities for their children.
    This issue is especially acute in my home state of Oregon, where 
the hurdles are both supply and affordability. I speak with many 
Oregonians--often women--who are limited by the lack of access to child 
care. It is not just women, it is families and the business communities 
as well. Earlier this year, I held a town hall meeting in Clatskanie, 
which is a rural city of about 1,700 people, very rural, where the Head 
Start center is the only child care available for the entire city. On 
Oregon's coast, the limited options for child care prevent the coastal 
towns from expanding and thriving when families have to turn down jobs 
because there is no child care available.
    The Oregon legislature created the Child Care Infrastructure Fund 
in 2023 to help expand child care options, but the funding is just a 
drop in the bucket compared to what is truly needed to meet the demand.
    The lack of affordable care limits opportunities, creates stress 
for families, and also holds back the economy.
    Child care challenges for parents and caregivers in the workforce 
cost the economy an estimated $122 billion each year in lost earnings, 
productivity, and revenue. Oregon alone loses $1.4 billion each year.
    These numbers reflect the missed economic potential as parents, 
particularly mothers, are forced to leave their jobs or reduce their 
working hours. When parents cannot work because they do not have 
reliable child care, businesses lose skilled workers and the economy 
suffers.
    Despite the high cost of child care, care providers are also 
struggling. The early care and education workforce is overwhelmingly 
composed of women, particularly women of color. Child care workers are 
among the lowest paid sectors and many child care providers have little 
to no access to other workplace benefits, like healthcare. It is 
unacceptable that the people caring for our nation's youngest are 
barely able to make a living wage and have stability in their own 
lives. I have spoken to child care workers who can't afford child care 
for their own children.
    The child care workforce is essential to our society, yet their 
compensation does not reflect the importance of their work.
    As Dr. Friedman included in her testimony, ``The root of the child 
care crisis is that we are relying on the private market to solve a 
problem it cannot.'' I know the Chairman mentioned public-private 
partnerships, and that is going to be a part of the testimony today. 
That may work in many communities, but there are many communities in 
Oregon and across the country where they do not have the ability to do 
that. Without bold and sustained federal investments, child care costs 
will continue to rise, and the workforce that provides this care will 
continue to struggle. We know that investing in child care helps 
address the needs of children, families, and providers. We also know 
that this is a good investment. Thank you, Ms. Codella Low. You wrote 
in your testimony that, ``for every $1 invested in early childhood 
programs, the return is up to $17 in reduced need for public 
assistance, increased earnings, and better educational outcomes.'' We 
know these programs work, yet we still struggle to fund them.
    I am grateful that solving the child care crisis is a bipartisan 
issue. Democrats and Republicans alike understand the importance of 
caring for our nation's children. We have bipartisan support for a 
$12.4 billion investment in the Child Care and Development Block Grant. 
I have been working for years on a bipartisan basis. I do not think Ms. 
Stefanik is here yet, but we have been working on the Child Care Food 
program to streamline and update it.
    I do need to point out that many of the policies that my colleagues 
in the majority are supporting will make life harder for everyone, 
including policies in the ``Big Ugly Bill'' that will cut crucial 
programs like SNAP and Medicaid, these are programs that support 
children, families, child care centers, and the child care workforce. 
Thousands, millions of children get their health benefits from Medicaid 
and rely on SNAP.
    Let us acknowledge that hurdles to fully fund child care limit 
economic growth, threaten employers and small businesses, hurt working 
families and the early educator workforce, and, because the early years 
are so critical to development, hinder the ability of children to meet 
their full potential. Again, it is a good investment to invest in early 
childhood education. It is undeniable that child care is necessary for 
parents and the economy and workforce, but child care is also important 
for children.
    Quality child care means not just having some place to park your 
kid during the day so you can go to work. Child care is early learning 
and social and emotional development. It sets kids up for success for 
the rest of their lives. Frankly, child care is the best investment we 
can make in our future.
    We should invest in child care. We have the Child Care for Working 
Families Act, which would cap the cost of child care at 7 percent of 
income, making it affordable for all parents, and also provide historic 
investments in the child care workforce, including higher pay, better 
benefits, and improved training opportunities. This workforce is 
critical to doing the important work.
    Again, investing in child care is an investment in our nation's 
future. We can and must enact policies that make child care accessible, 
affordable, and high-quality for every family. The cost of inaction is 
great, and families, workers, and the economy cannot wait any longer.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I look forward to the discussion, and I 
yield back.
                                 ______
                                 
    Chairman Kiley. Pursuant to Committee Rule 8(c), all 
members who wish to insert written statements into the record 
may do so by submitting them to the Committee Clerk 
electronically in Microsoft Word format by 5 p.m., 14 days 
after this hearing. Without objection, the hearing record will 
remain open for 14 days to allow such statements and other 
extraneous material noted during the hearing to be submitted 
for the official hearing record.
    I note that some of our colleagues who are not permanent 
members of the Subcommittee may be waiving on for the purpose 
of today's hearing. I will now introduce our witnesses.
    Our first witness is Mrs. Caitlin Codella Low, the Managing 
Director of Human Capital for the Bipartisan Policy Center here 
in Washington, DC. To introduce our second witness, I would 
like to recognize the gentleman from Indiana, Representative 
Messmer.
    Mr. Messmer. Well, thank you, Chairman Kiley. It is my 
honor and privilege to introduce Hon. Todd D. Barton, Mayor of 
the city of Crawfordsville in the great State of Indiana. Mayor 
Barton has been an excellent leader of his community, and I am 
eager for him to share how they can apply the successes in 
Crawfordsville on a larger scale. With that, Mr. Chairman, I 
yield back.
    Chairman Kiley. Thank you, Mr. Messmer. Our third witness 
is Dr. Ruth Friedman, a Senior Fellow for the Century 
Foundation, also here in D.C. Our fourth witness is Ms. Celia 
Hartman Sims, the President and Founder of the Abecedarian 
Group in Houston, Texas.
    We thank the witnesses for being here today, and we look 
forward to your testimony. Pursuant to Committee Rules, I would 
ask that you each limit your oral presentation to a 3-minute 
summary of your written statement, as Committee members have 
many questions for you. The clock will count down from 3 
minutes.
    However, pursuant to Committee Rule 8-D, and Committee 
practice, we will not cut you off, cutoff your testimony until 
you reach the 5-minute mark. I would also like to remind the 
witnesses to be aware of your responsibility to provide 
accurate information to the Subcommittee.
    I will first recognize Mrs. Codella Low for your testimony.

  STATEMENT OF MRS. CAITLIN CODELLA LOW, MANAGING DIRECTOR OF 
   HUMAN CAPITAL, BIPARTISAN POLICY CENTER, WASHINGTON, D.C.

    Mrs. Codella Low. Chairman Kiley, Ranking Member Bonamici, 
and members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to 
testify today. My name is Caitlin Codella Low, and I serve as 
the Managing Director of the Human Capital Program of the 
Bipartisan Policy Center.
    Childcare is more than a family issue. It is a foundational 
component of our economic infrastructure. Providers are 
stretched thin, operating on razor thin margins with limited 
capacity to grow or improve quality without raising prices. Two 
thirds of families, according to BPC polling, are already 
paying the most they can afford.
    This broken market is holding back families, businesses and 
our broader economy. Addressing it is a necessary step toward 
building a stronger, more competitive workforce. American 
families are not a one size fits all, they differ in geography, 
schedule, culture,income, and every day parents navigate 
complex decisions to do what is best for their children.
    As a working mom of two small children, I know first-hand 
that there is no more personal or critical choice than deciding 
how and with whom your child will be cared for. At BPC, our 
national survey consistently shows that parents prioritize 
trust and flexibility when choosing childcare.
    For some, that means center-based care. For others it is a 
neighbor, a relative, a home-based provider, and others staying 
at home with their child is the right decision for them. 
Federal policies should support, not limit, the choice parents 
must make. Childcare is not just a family issue. Childcare is a 
workforce issue, and a critical component to our economic 
infrastructure. Our economy loses more than 120 billion dollars 
every year due to breakdowns in the childcare system, from lost 
earnings, missed work, and reduced productivity.
    Approximately 71 percent of all children under the age of 5 
in the U.S. live in a household where all parents work. 58 
percent of the parents report major disruptions in work because 
they could not find affordable, reliable childcare. Today, the 
average cost of childcare exceeds $10,000 per child, and it is 
more than public child tuition in most states, more than the 
cost of rent in all 50.
    Employers are paying the price. Childcare challenges lead 
to higher absenteeism, lower retention, and difficulty 
recruiting talent. For small business and frontline industries 
in particular, childcare is no longer a nice to have. It is a 
competitive necessity. If we want to grow our economy, close 
talent gaps, and build the best economy in the world, then 
childcare is not optional, it is essential.
    The Federal Government has provided support for families 
through CCDBG and that funding is the cornerstone of our 
Nation's childcare system. This program has helped ensure 
parents are able to make ends meet and access the childcare 
that meets their needs. However, the system was last updated 
more than a decade ago, and that system must modernize to meet 
the needs of today's families.
    BPC has long advocated for smart policy updates that can 
make the system stronger, and drive innovation. We believe 
targeted reforms can expand access, improve affordability, 
preserve family choice, while also strengthening the workforce 
and the economy.
    Modernization should focus on enabling more parents to work 
and support multiple care options, recognize that childcare is 
essential infrastructure that underpins both today's labor 
force and the development of tomorrow's workforce. It is 
through that lens that the BPC has launched the Commission on 
the American Workforce to create a bipartisan strategy to 
strengthen the workforce, expand economic opportunity, and 
ensure the United States remains competitive.
    Childcare is a critical component of the Commission's work 
because, as we have stated, without stable childcare for 
families, our workforce and thus our economy breaks. Childcare 
is not just a personal decision. It is a national priority. It 
touches every part of our economy, and yet for far too many 
families our current system makes us feel like we are being 
asked to solve an impossible equation.
    I often describe childcare as a three-legged stool, access, 
quality and affordability. Each leg essential and yet achieving 
all three at once remains elusive for most parents and equally 
challenging for policymakers. When one leg is missing, the 
whole system becomes unstable. Families, employers, and the 
broader economy are paying the price.
    We have a responsibility to study that stool, and for smart 
policy and targeted reforms, and bipartisan cooperations, we 
can build a system that supports the workforce of today, and 
the workforce of tomorrow. The good news is there is bipartisan 
momentum, and I want to thank you all for your leadership on 
that.
    The Bipartisan Policy Center stands ready to support the 
Committee in advancing practical, lasting solutions that 
reflect the needs of the workforce, and the economic demands, 
and we look forward to working with you. Thank you very much.
    [The prepared statement of Mrs. Codella Low follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]     

    Chairman Kiley. Thanks very much. Mayor Barton, you are 
recognized for your testimony.

       STATEMENT OF HON. TODD D. BARTON, MAYOR, CITY OF 
            CRAWFORDSVILLE, CRAWFORDSVILLE, INDIANA

    Mayor Barton. Chairman Kiley, Ranking Member Bonamici, and 
members of the Committee, I want to thank you for inviting me 
to testify here today. My name is Todd Barton and I serve as 
the Mayor of Crawfordsville, Indiana. Today I am here to share 
our community's journey in addressing the critical shortage of 
affordable, high-quality childcare, a challenge that has deeply 
affected our workforce and economic potential.
    Early in my tenure, through annual visits with local 
employers, we repeatedly heard the same concern, a lack of 
childcare was keeping people out of the workforce or reducing 
their productivity. We confirmed this through local and 
statewide studies, one of which showed that our community was 
losing nearly 8 million dollars annually in business impact 
alone, due to childcare related issues.
    It was clear childcare was not just a family issue it was 
an economic issue. In response we formed a Childcare Task Force 
in collaboration with county leaders, employers and the 
Montgomery County Community Foundation. That task force evolved 
into the Montgomery County Early Childhood Coalition, which now 
leads our efforts to create an accessible, high-quality early 
education system.
    The coalition's five strategic goals are to improve 
education, accessibility, affordability, program quality, and 
support for childcare providers. Our initiatives have been wide 
ranging. We launched Camp Milligan, a full-day summer program 
for school aged children.
    We hired a full-time early learning director to support 
childcare providers, created professional development 
opportunities for educators, and improved affordability for 
working parents by building sustainability and sustainability 
funding into our model.
    A centerpiece of our effort is the Montgomery County Early 
Learning Center, which opened earlier this year with 124 new 
childcare seats. This 5-million-dollar project was made 
possible by an unprecedented partnership of 16 entities across 
government, business and philanthropy.
    It has already increased our childcare capacity by over 30 
percent. It is helping us recruit and retain workers in an era 
of strong, local economic growth. Ultimately, we have come to 
understand that early learning is not only critical for today's 
workforce, but essential for shaping the workforce of tomorrow.
    We are proud of the model we have built in Crawfordsville, 
a data driven, community led, and fully collaborative approach 
that we believe can serve as a template for other rural 
communities.
    To sustain this scale of work we need strong Federal 
support. Programs like the Child Care Development Block Grant, 
and employer provided childcare credit are essential tools that 
we need at our disposal. These programs will help working 
families stabilize our workforce and invest in the next 
generation.
    Thank you for the opportunity to share our story, and I 
look forward to your questions.
    [The prepared statement of Mayor Barton follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 
    
    Chairman Kiley. Thanks very much. Dr. Friedman, you are 
recognized for your testimony.

  STATEMENT OF DR. RUTH FRIEDMAN, SENIOR FELLOW, THE CENTURY 
                  FOUNDATION, WASHINGTON, D.C.

    Ms. Friedman. Thank you. Thank you for inviting me to 
testify today. I spent 25 years working to increase the high-
quality early learning programs, and access to them. Most 
recently, as Director of the HHS Office of Childcare for the 
Biden-Harris administration, where I oversaw the 12-billion-
dollar Federal childcare program known as CCDBG or CCDF, as 
well as overseeing the 53 billion dollars in childcare COVID 
relief funding.
    As Director, I spoke regularly with providers, State 
agencies, tribes and territories about their childcare 
challenges. I heard about the CCDF program and how important it 
was, and the successes of the pandemic relief funding, in 
stabilizing the childcare sector and lowering family costs 
during a very turbulent time.
    They also made it clear we have a much bigger nationwide 
childcare crisis. Put simply, parents cannot find or afford the 
childcare they need, and providers cannot charge high enough 
fees to stay afloat. There are three main interrelated problems 
fueling this crisis. First, there is not enough childcare to 
meet the demand, so families struggle to find care that fits 
their work hours and their family needs.
    Childcare for infants and toddlers, care for children with 
disabilities, care during non-traditional work hours and in 
rural areas is particularly scarce. Second, childcare is a 
major financial strain for families. Inal-most all states 
families pay more for childcare than housing or food, and the 
cost of childcare is rising faster than inflation.
    The high prices hurt family budgets, make family life 
harder, and cause under employment and unstable employment. 
Third, providers, most of whom are small businesses, are 
struggling to stay afloat and stay staffed because they cannot 
afford to meet the rising costs of labor, rent, insurance and 
everyday goods.
    In most communities, the business model only works at all 
by paying childcare staff very low wages with few benefits, and 
problems recruiting and retaining childcare workers has become 
particularly acute. Families, businesses, and America's economy 
are paying the price of this reality to the tune of billions of 
dollars in lost wages, productivity, and growth every year.
    The root of the childcare crisis is that we are relying on 
the private market to solve a problem it cannot. The market 
does not provide enough childcare to meet family needs because 
the true cost of care is greater than prices parents can pay. 
Providers cannot address a workforce shortage without improving 
compensation, and better compensation and stable operations are 
not possible without significant tuition hikes, and parents are 
already maxed out.
    The CCDF program, while absolutely critical for the 900,000 
families who get assistance, and the millions more who benefit 
from its quality initiatives, is neither funded, nor designed 
to fix the scope of the childcare problems we are discussing 
today.
    Likewise, the Head Start program, and the preschool 
development grant program help with the situation, but they 
also are not intended to address the scope of the problem.
    Solving the childcare crisis requires significant new 
Federal and State investments, comprehensively directed at 
staff compensation, and building a stable supply with a range 
of childcare options without the cost falling to parents.
    Ranking Member Scott and Senator Murray have led the way 
with a transformative plan for the type of childcare reform 
American families really need.
    An approach like the Childcare for Working Families Act 
would address supply issues, and reduce costs for millions of 
families, while building on the flexibility of the current 
system. It would eliminate childcare as a barrier to parents' 
stable employment, family's economic stability and parent and 
child well-being, giving parents much more freedom to raise 
strong families.
    Recent Federal proposals to childcare and the tax code will 
not solve the childcare crisis because they do little about 
parent costs, or supply issues, and do nothing for the 
childcare workforce shortage. Worse, we are going in the wrong 
direction in three important ways.
    First, the Reconciliation Bill is going to exacerbate the 
childcare workforce shortage, reduce supply, and make it harder 
for many families to afford childcare.
    Second, political leadership at HHS has indicated to some 
stakeholders they intend to get rid of the 2024 Rule that 
finally aligned the CCDF program with Federal statute, to pay 
providers on time, and more fairly, and when implemented, would 
improve parent choice and help stabilize provider operations.
    Third, DOGE pushed out half of the Federal Office of 
Childcare staff this spring. Without adequate staffing, Federal 
funds will not go as far, and ultimately childcare will be less 
safe, harder to find, and more expensive.
    Our country's approach of relying primarily on a parent 
funded, broken market fails families, hurts businesses, and 
harms America's economy. This is a solvable problem but will 
require transformative investment for America's families. Thank 
you.
    [The prepared statement of Dr. Friedman follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]     

    Chairman Kiley. Thanks very much. Ms. Sims, you are 
recognized for your testimony.

STATEMENT OF MS. CELIA HARTMAN SIMS, PRESIDENT AND FOUNDER, THE 
               ABECEDARIAN GROUP, HOUSTON, TEXAS

    Ms. Sims. Chairman Kiley, Ranking Member Bonamici, and 
members of the Subcommittee, thank you so much for the 
opportunity to speak with you all today. To get straight to the 
point, as you have heard by the other witnesses, parents of 
young children cannot work without childcare.
    Because childcare is directly tied to the ability of 
parents to work, childcare is intrinsically tied to employers 
being able to hire, and communities being able to thrive. 
Breakdowns in childcare result in parents missing out on income 
and lost productivity for employers.
    K-12 school closures during COVID made clear that parents 
with young children need childcare to work. The childcare 
sector, unlike K-12, understood this, kept its doors open for 
families, and demonstrated the truly essential service that 
childcare provides for workers, employers, and the broader 
economy.
    Childcare access creates economic opportunity at the 
individual level, and economic development at the local level 
With limited availability of childcare, towns lose residents 
and businesses. A rural North Carolina county I recently 
visited described how for multiple reasons post-COVID, it lost 
over half of its center-based care, and 80 percent of its 
family childcare homes.
    With so little car now available, residents are having to 
find childcare in a more populous neighboring county. If people 
feel like they have to go to another county for children, they 
may decide it better all around to seek work in that 
neighboring county. Small communities cannot survive, let alone 
growth without accessible childcare.
    Nothing, however, is more personal to parents than deciding 
with whom to leave their child when they go to work, and 
without a doubt, as others have said, the No. 1 criterion for 
parents in choosing a childcare provider is trust.
    Parents are not simply looking for the cheapest childcare 
arrangement. They will sacrifice time, convenience and money to 
ensure their children are in quality safe environments.
    Given the very personal nature of making a childcare 
decision, parents have varying childcare preferences, 
indicating strong support for our Nation's mixed delivery 
system of childcare, one that is inclusive of centers, family 
childcare homes, faith-based providers, for-profit, nonprofit, 
public and private providers. No two families or children are 
alike. What is best for one family will not be best for another 
family.
    Parents, not government, are and should remain the ones who 
choose what is best for their child. Respecting parent choice 
in childcare is the core tenant of the Federal childcare and 
development block grant, and the reason the program has 
garnered such strong, bipartisan support over the years.
    CCDBG should remain the Federal Government's hallmark 
childcare program to support America's working families. 
Affordability, however, is the greatest barrier for working 
families to access childcare they won't need and want, but why 
people as is childcare so expensive? People, plain and simple. 
Staff salaries are by far the greatest budget line item for a 
childcare provider.
    Yes, a provider might reduce the number of teachers in 
classrooms, but fewer teachers in classrooms is bad for child 
safety. To be sure there are, as in any regulated sector, rules 
and regulations that can and should be either cut or 
streamlined to reduce costs, but teachers cannot be reduced.
    Tackling childcare affordability for working families is a 
public/private endeavor, including government, Federal, State 
and local, parents, businesses, and religious and other 
community organizations. As others have discussed, local 
communities are addressing the childcare access and 
affordability problem in varying ways and designing solutions 
for their local contacts.
    In the Federal Government, at the Federal level, parents 
and businesses show support for a multipronged Federal strategy 
to assist-working parents afford childcare. The good news is 
that all of these solutions they support are existing Federal 
programs, thus we do not need new Federal programs to address 
childcare affordability.
    We need to continue to support and promote the programs we 
presently have, including childcare vouchers provided under 
CCDBG, the Federal Government's hallmark Federal childcare 
program, Federal tax credits, including the employer provided 
child tax credit, the child independent care tax credit, and 
dependent care assisted programs, all of which are presently 
included for enhancement under the House and Senate 
Reconciliation Bills.
    Three, a host of current Federal programs under numerous 
agencies, including the Agricultural Department, SBA, that can 
be used to expand childcare in underserved communities. In 
closing, for working families, childcare is a must have, not a 
nice to have, and is a service that pays immediate economic 
benefit for individuals being able to work, employers being 
able to hire, and communities being able to grow.
    Thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today, and 
I look forward to your questions.
    [The prepared statement of Ms. Sims follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]     

    Chairman Kiley. Thank You very much. Under Committee Rule 
9, we will now question the witnesses under the 5-minute rule. 
The Representative from Guam, Mr. Moylan is recognized first.
    Mr. Moylan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member for 
hosting this important hearing today, and access to high-
quality, affordable childcare is important to many parents, and 
provides the flexibility needed to participate in the 
workforce.
    Childcare benefits families and communities alike, boasting 
local economies and empowering parents. Block grant approval is 
hard to receive because the threshold is so low, working-class 
families make too much money to qualify, even if slightly above 
the minimum wage you are disqualified.
    Households of two is at $62,711.84, and this forces parents 
to quit their jobs to access CCDBG payments. Ms. Sims, 
something I have heard several times from my constituents is 
that the current system is broken, and encourages reliance on 
public assistance, more than uplifting families.
    Thresholds for assistance relative to incomes on Guam 
sometimes incentivize working parents to leave the workforce, 
rather than participate in it. How can Congress reform these 
systems, so that public assistance goes hand in hand with 
social mobility and not against it?
    Ms. Codella Low, you will follow that same question please.
    Ms. Sims.
    Ms. Sims. Thank you for the question. As you mentioned the 
income eligibility, the Federal statute limits that to a State. 
You cannot make more than 75 percent of the State median 
income. What is important is to continue, I think, the long, 
bipartisan investments in the childcare development block grant 
because that funding has increased.
    It first doubled under the first Trump administration, it 
has continued to double, I mean to continue to increase ever 
since as more funds are in there. It has allowed states to 
increase their eligibility up against that cap.
    What is also important, we made some significant changes in 
the last reauthorization of CCDBG, was to ensure that there was 
a graduated phaseout, so that you are not creating a cliff 
effect, so that if a parent who is presently receiving 
childcare assistance makes a dollar more than all of a sudden 
they automatically lose their assistance.
    We want that to stay or step downward, that encourages 
families to stay in the workforce, but not just stay in the 
workforce, but to feel like they can take, you know, a 
promotion and a raise, and continue to move forward.
    Ms. Codella Low. I would say what Celia said is absolutely 
correct. There has been increased funding, Bipartisan Policy 
Center has supported funding increases for CCBG. I think one of 
the major factors of this is allowing for parents to make 
choices that are right for them, and also allow for parents to 
matriculate in and out of the economy in a way that allows them 
to get the training necessary to get on to the new jobs, or to 
continue in, you know, any matter that allows them to have 
stability in the system.
    Mr. Moylan. Thank you both. Mayor Barton, your city is 
similar in size to some of Guam's villages, and I think our 
weather might be a bit different though. In your testimony you 
talked about how operating a childcare business is not 
economically feasible in smaller communities.
    Based on your experience and success, how can Congress 
empower working families and small communities across America?
    Mayor Barton. Thank you for the question, and I think you 
are correct, the weather is probably not similar. Yes, I think 
you know for us it is figuring out how to bridge those gaps and 
understanding that in a rural community that the economies of 
scale are not in our favor, and that is the biggest challenge 
that we faced in operating childcare centers in our community.
    It is finding ways for everyone to come together. You face 
the reality that government cannot solve this alone, private 
operators cannot solve this alone, and in most cases 
philanthropy or nonprofits cannot solve this, so it is really 
laying out that business model and looking for those gaps and 
plugging sustainability into the model.
    Mr. Moylan. Thank you. Finally, Ms. Low, you began your 
testimony with the importance of parental choice. I think it is 
important to remember that although we are one nation, we have 
many cultures in our country. That is especially true in places 
like the U.S. territories. Can you elaborate more on how 
parental choice benefits communities across our country?
    Ms. Codella Low. Yes. I think the reality is that parents 
are living very different lives from their neighbors, and they 
need to be able to plug into a childcare system that works for 
the needs that they have. My neighbor works overnights, and you 
know, there are very few childcare centers that can help to 
deal with that challenge, right?
    If we are only thinking about a one size fits all solution, 
we are not thinking about the vast majority of our economy, and 
the needs that each individual might have.
    Mr. Moylan. Thank you so much. Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Chairman Kiley. Thank you very much. Ranking Member 
Bonamici is recognized for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Bonamici. Thank you, Mr., Chairman, and thank you all 
for your excellent testimony. Across Oregon, like most of the 
country, there is an inadequate supply of appropriately 
regulated childcare, especially for infants and toddlers. I 
have a friend who has twin grandbabies, can you imagine?
    I mean it like it automatically doubles the cost, and the 
challenge. I mentioned even before the pandemic the Oregon 
Childcare Research Partnership found that all of our 36 
counties were childcare deserts, meaning there are more 
children for every available, three or more children for every 
available slot. The demand is far greater than the supply, as 
we all recognize.
    Now, approximately half of the families in this country 
live in childcare deserts, and there simply is not enough to 
meet the demand, and what exists is unaffordable. That we have 
established. Nationwide childcare costs have risen about 214 
percent since my daughter was born in 1990. I am surprised it 
is not more than that from what I am hearing.
    As I mentioned, to help address this, Oregon's legislature 
created the Childcare Infrastructure Fund in 2023, but again, 
just a drop in the bucket. At the Federal level, we do not have 
a similar program dedicated to building out the supply of 
childcare. Dr. Friedman, welcome back to the Committee, what 
policies have shown promise in increasing the supply of 
affordable childcare?
    Ms. Friedman. Thank you very much for the question. I, you 
know, interestingly we have seen just in the past year a slight 
tick up in supply for the first time, interestingly a decent 
tick up in family childcare in a few different states, 
California, Massachusetts and Virginia.
    I do not think it is an accident. I think this is a 
combination of a few different things. One is states use some 
of their COVID relief money to increase supply. They made 
startup grants, expansion grants. They created family childcare 
support networks to try to make the business side easier for 
family childcare. California, for the first time, made 
healthcare and retirement benefits available for family 
childcare.
    We have seen some investments by states, specifically aimed 
at trying to increase supply because they have recognized it is 
such a problem. In addition, one of the things we did in the 
administration that I think was very important is with CCDBG we 
decided to enforce one of its very important tenants, which 
requires reimbursement rates to not be so low that parents do 
not have access to care.
    States reacted by increasing their reimbursement rates, 
their rates for family childcare were particularly low. In 
addition, we have seen more states try grants and contracts to 
try to address supply. Supply is a priority, and I think, you 
know, what we see is when there are investments in increasing 
supply. they are effective.
    What makes me nervous is some of the State investments are 
already being zeroed out. There were some private investments I 
know in some states where we saw increases that are not part of 
their next year budgets, and, you know, it needs sustained 
investment.
    Ms. Bonamici. I appreciate that, and I know recruitment and 
retention are huge concerns. Dr. Friedman, again, immigrants 
make up about 20 percent of the childcare workforce nationwide, 
and in some urban areas up to 50 percent of the workforce. I am 
hearing from constituents in Oregon who have significant 
concerns about immigration enforcement, as it relates to 
childcare, particularly with for example, TPS workers, 
Dreamers.
    The Trump administration, as well as some of my colleagues 
across the aisle have demonized immigrants, even though they 
contribute greatly to our economy and our childcare system. It 
relies on immigrant workers in many places, and unfortunately, 
we have not been able to pass humane immigration reform, or 
even the Dream Act, to give these hardworking, aspiring 
Americans a path to citizenship.
    Since 2011, childcare programs were considered off limits 
for immigration enforcement, but the President ended this 
policy on day one, meaning the U.S. Immigration and Customs 
Enforcement can now enter schools, daycare centers, and other 
locations where children spend their days.
    Dr. Friedman, I know you are not an immigration expert, but 
do you agree that immigrants play an important role in the 
childcare sector, and if childcare workers do not feel safe 
working in the sector, what would it take to prepare and 
educate thousands of new childcare providers in a short period 
of time?
    Ms. Friedman. Yes, thank you. There is no doubt that 
immigrants play a large part in providing the childcare in this 
country, and if that important provider population were to 
disappear, we would be in real trouble. Childcare would go 
away. We already are seeing that. There are not enough 
childcare staff to keep all of the classrooms open in existing 
programs, and programs are closing down because of lack of 
staff.
    If the childcare worker crisis increases, we will see 
childcare close and become less available and more expensive.
    Ms. Bonamici. Thank you, I am out of time. I yield back.
    Chairman Kiley. Representative Mackenzie of Pennsylvania is 
recognized.
    Mr. Mackenzie. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to 
all of our testifiers here today. It is great to be talking 
about such an important issue for working families, and also 
the way that it impacts our economic growth here in America. It 
is also great to see that there is broad bipartisan recognition 
of the problem.
    I think everybody is recognizing the problem for working 
families to access quality and affordable childcare, the 
barrier that it creates for people going back into the 
workforce after they have their child. The challenges that we 
face with childcare providers.
    We see this problem in my district in Pennsylvania, where 
there is this mismatch in our local marketplace of the quality, 
affordable, accessible childcare that people are looking for, 
and what is available for working families as they try to re-
enter that market.
    Great to see that. Now, my questions--I am going to go to 
Ms. Sims first. I have legislation, House Resolution 1426, 
which would expand the Child and Dependent Care tax credit, so 
parents can afford a broader range of child options. I would 
love to hear your perspective as to why it is important that 
the Federal policies that we actually put out give families the 
flexibility to choose the childcare arrangements that best meet 
their individual needs?
    Ms. Sims. Sure. As I mentioned in my testimony. One, I 
think the tax credits in CCDBG--it is all of the above. There 
is not going to be one singular program that can solve 
everything. Similar, that is the same thing with a childcare 
provider. There is not one--the same provider for every parent, 
or for every child. There are a number of parents who have two 
children, and one child they will put in a childcare center, 
because they understand that that child will thrive there.
    They may take the other child and want to enroll them in a 
family childcare home because that smaller setting is best for 
them. Similar faith-based providers, you know, again trust is 
the No. 1 criterion, and so, if that is your faith community, 
that is where you are going to seek, and we want to have all of 
those solutions available for our parents.
    Yes, it is all of the above in terms of the types of 
programs we need, tax--there is tax relief, there is the 
voucher program on the parents, there is not one singular 
solution, so we do not want to prejudice one provider over 
another.
    Mr. Mackenzie. Well, I appreciate that, and I agree that 
the importance of choice is so paramount across all educational 
opportunities, and that extends to childcare and early learning 
as well, so appreciate your thoughts there. Mayor Barton, I 
will go to you next. You have shown great local leadership on 
this topic, and I want to commend you for everything that you 
have done in your local community so far.
    How could policies like you have put in place there 
actually reflect this choice and the individuals from families 
and employers in your local community? How did you work that 
into your solutions, all of these different thoughts from local 
stakeholders into what you have put together, just a really 
terrific solution.
    Mayor Barton. I think we acknowledged, you know, from the 
very beginning that choice had to be a part of what we were 
offering, and we were very aware that as we were in the 
fundraising phase, and creating our early learning center, we 
did not want to create a situation where it was the government-
sanctioned childcare option for our community.
    We wanted people to have a choice, so and additionally, we 
did not want to lose existing childcare capacity in our 
community, so we built into our system to not only expand 
capacity, but to support the existing capacity, which is very 
diverse. It is a combination of home-based, center-based, you 
know faith-based, all those pieces coming together.
    We knew that we needed that variety and those options in 
our community, so we deliberately incorporated that into our 
model.
    Mr. Mackenzie. Well, thank you. I think it is a model that 
what we have heard so far really could be replicated and 
expanded elsewhere, so thank you for your leadership on this 
topic.
    Mayor Barton. Thank you.
    Mr. Mackenzie. Finally, I will go to Ms. Low, talking about 
that access to quality, affordable childcare. We have talked a 
little bit so far about the challenges that providers face, and 
increasing supply of childcare providers, not only in terms of 
the facilities, but also the workers there, getting them into 
those positions, making sure that they are earning a wage that 
they can actually sustain their own families in these roles.
    Tell me about your thoughts on what we should be doing to 
increase supply, and make it more likely that we get more 
childcare providers online and operational?
    Ms. Codella Low. Yes, thank you for the question. I think 
providers, as you know, typically are operating on reserves and 
margins, as we know staff is the highest cost that they are 
paying out, and we know that in order to make any changes to 
the system they almost are always faced with raising tuition 
rates, and we know that parents most likely just cannot afford 
more.
    They are sort of put into an impossible equation, and in a 
lot of cases any increased costs, obviously are put to 
families, and so there is opportunities to think about what we 
are doing in CCDBG, and allow for Federal capital investments 
to--for, excuse me, for the providers to help to--sorry, help 
to invest in their facilities, and meet the needs that each of 
these facilities need in order to grow and expand.
    Mr. Mackenzie. Great, well thank you. Again, I want to 
thank all of you for being here today, just a terrific topic. I 
am glad we are focusing on it on this Subcommittee. I would 
like to thank the leadership of our Chairman, I look forward to 
working with everybody on this problem that we all recognize to 
find some great bipartisan solutions to address these 
challenges, and help working families across the country. Thank 
you, and I yield back.
    Chairman Kiley. Representative Lee of Pennsylvania is 
recognized.
    Ms. Lee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate that we all 
understand and agree that there is a childcare crisis in this 
country. The costs of child care if you can even find it, 
pushes thousands of families into poverty every single year. In 
Pennsylvania, infant and toddler care costs an average of 
$14,000 per year.
    That is more than someone's college tuition. We need child 
care in this country. We need it so that all parents and 
caregivers have the option to participate in the workforce and 
provide for their families. We need it to support children's 
early cognitive, social and emotional development, which we 
know has lasting effects into adulthood.
    We need it because as human beings, it is our moral 
obligation to care for one another, which some consider a 
radical stance. I do not, of course. We need more Federal 
investment in childcare because existing programs are quite 
frankly not cutting it. Less than a third of the children in my 
district receive subsidies that they are eligible for, that 
leaves almost 7,000 children in my district whose families 
cannot afford child care, and who cannot access subsidies.
    Meanwhile, the average childcare worker in my district 
makes less than $30,000 per year. That is almost $40,000 less 
than the average kindergarten teacher, who are also obviously 
grossly underpaid as a profession. Child care workers are 
overwhelmingly women, disproportionately women of color of 
course, yet black early childhood educators still make less 
than 80 percent of what their white counterparts make.
    This is a crisis from every single angle. This is 
especially insulting considering how much of today's child care 
infrastructure we owe to black communities and the civil rights 
movement when Head Start was first founded. Red states, like 
Mississippi, refused Federal Head Start grants, arguing that 
benefits to black children discriminated against white 
children, an argument that is eerily similar to the current 
administration's rhetoric.
    Groups like Child Development Group of Mississippi, run by 
civil rights leaders and black mothers persisted to ensure that 
Head Start was successful. When school superintendents refused 
to rent out buildings, school buildings or buses to Head Start 
programs, communities came together to make sure that children 
had a place to go, and a way to get there, so we have models of 
success.
    Since then, Head Start has served over 40 million people, 
including me, and over, you know, 2,500 children in my 
district, who are enrolled right now. Head Start success turned 
it into a program supported across political and geographic 
lines. When a leaked proposal from the Department of Health and 
Human Services earlier this year threatened to eliminate Head 
Start, this broad support is why it was ultimately still 
included in the administration's budget request.
    Dr. Friedman, briefly, what would happen if families and 
children, including the 2,500 children in my district, what 
would happen if Head Start were cut?
    Ms. Friedman. If Head Start were cut or eliminated, it 
would have a number of really devastating consequences in this 
country. First, for the families who would be receiving Head 
Start, they would lose out on that very important early 
childhood programming, and the families who receive very 
important wraparound services, help finding jobs, help 
receiving various sorts of social services, would lose out on 
that as well.
    In addition, it would absolutely and immediately expand the 
childcare crisis that we have in this country. You would have 
750,000 families who suddenly did not have child care, and 
would need to find it, and would have huge economic impacts as 
well.
    Ms. Lee. Certainly. Real quickly, earlier this year the 
administration closed five regional Head Start offices and DOGE 
fired hundreds of employees within the Administration for 
Children and Families. How did those office closures and 
employee firings impact the program?
    Ms. Friedman. Yes, we are already seeing very bad impacts 
from those closings. Programs, local programs are not getting 
the support and the answers they need, grants are coming slowly 
to them, which is very, very problematic in Head Start because 
they really work month to month with their budget, and lost 
anenormous amount of expertise on the local needs those 
programs service.
    Ms. Lee. Thank you. Even if Head Start is ultimately 
funded, if the office of Head Start and its regional offices 
are not staffed, it is still set up to fail. As you pointed out 
in your testimony, Dr. Friedman, even at its best, Head Start 
cannot address the full scope of the childcare crisis.
    In order to do that, and remove barriers to economic 
growth, we have to address the persistent racial and gender 
wage gaps within the childcare industry. We need to invest in 
programs like SNAP and Medicaid, that over 20 percent of 
Pennsylvania's early childhood educators rely on, and that 
House Republicans just cut in the Reconciliation Bill they 
passed.
    We need much more Federal investment in child care. We know 
that for every dollar we invest in early childhood education, 
we save substantially more on services that children will not 
need as they grow up. This is why we need to pass the 
Democrat's legislation like the Child Care for Every Community 
Act, and Child Care for Working Families Act, which I am 
looking forward to introducing with Ranking Member Scott in the 
near future.
    These bills would help put an end to this crisis by making 
sure families actually have access to child care slots, that no 
family spends more than 7 percent of their income on child 
care, and that all early childhood educators make a livable 
wage. Thank you so much for the time, and I yield back.
    Chairman Kiley. Representative Harris of North Carolina is 
recognized.
    Mr. Harris. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman, and for the 
subject matter we have today, and for this hearing, and to all 
of you on the panel that have shared your time and your 
expertise. This is a very, very relevant subject I think all of 
us are dealing with.
    Mayor Barton, do you think the Federal Government on its 
own has the ability to simply spend or regulate its way out of 
the childcare crisis that we are discussing today?
    Mayor Barton. That is a good question to ask somebody in 
local government I guess, but I appreciate the question. No, I 
do not think so. I think it takes all of us coming together, 
and you know, from the local rural perspective, right, and I am 
in a rural community, I think there is an understanding that 
the current system is broken. We talk about that a lot. We talk 
about, you know, the business model is broken, but also on the 
funding side. I will not pretend to know what funding is 
available or is not available on the Federal side.
    I will tell you that, you know, the current system, the 
CCDBG funding with its focus on vouchers, that is fantastic if 
you have seats. In the rural communities you can have a 
voucher. There are vouchers out there, but there are no seats, 
right, so we have to really focus on the side of this, which 
helps us incentivize the business model to get the seats so 
that they exist, so that the people can even use the vouchers 
that are out there.
    You know, it is not possible to spend our way out of this, 
but it is going to take a combination of Federal spending and 
Federal focus, along with states, local governments, and 
businesses ultimately, and I think that is the unique aspect of 
our model was engaging the businesses in this discussion.
    In our reality in a rural community, they are competing for 
workforce, and everything they can do to make themselves more 
competitive with the business down the road, they need to be 
doing. We saw that with, you know, near site wellness clinics 
on the health side, and that has now spilled over to the child 
care side as well.
    Mr. Harris. Well, thank you for your answer. The fact is, 
contrary to the beliefs of those on the other side of the 
aisle, simply spending more Federal tax dollars, or increasing 
Federal regulations will not solve this issue. As a 
Representative of the largely rural district myself, I have 
also seen first-hand the outsized effects that accessible child 
care can have on rural communities.
    Quite frankly, that was one reason I was greatly encouraged 
by your testimony, Mayor, detailing the actions that you and 
other community leaders took in Montgomery County, Indiana, to 
establish a coalition to tackle the problem. I want to give you 
a chance for in the few minutes we have left, as legislators, 
what can we do in our capacity to help communities like yours 
meet today's child care challenges at the local level?
    Mayor Barton. I think the most important thing is to create 
an environment where we can innovate. Every community is 
different and giving us the flexibility to come up with new 
solutions like we have done. You know, sadly, we have at times 
said we are going to solve this problem on our own because we 
just realize that the help is not coming from above, right?
    Giving communities the ability to do that, and that 
flexibility, is probably the single most important thing you 
can do. Then becoming a partner, and looking at the model we 
have created, the model we have created can be applied, you 
know, more globally across the Nation if we so choose to do, 
but you have to create the environment that allows that, and 
that does not exist in a lot of areas.
    Mr. Harris. On that same note, I will ask from your 
perspective, conversely, what is Washington doing that could 
hinder the growth in the child care space?
    Mayor Barton. Another good question. You know, I do not 
know that I can really answer what they are doing that is 
hindering it other than, you know, when you create situations 
where that wage pressure keeps people out of this workforce, 
you know, child care is going to be the first place we are 
going to see that, right?
    We have to find ways to fill in those gaps and address that 
piece of it. I think the other piece, you know, from the 
Federal side, is you know, the more these solutions that are 
driven through State governments, and I am speaking totally 
from the local level here, that more of those solutions that 
are driven through State governments, the more levels of 
confusion that, you know, develop.
    Anything you can do to streamline that process, and again 
give those local governments the flexibility, and communities 
the chance to innovate and come up with different solutions 
would be great.
    Mr. Harris. Thank you, sir. Ms. Sims, real quickly, in the 
few seconds I have left, in your testimony you mentioned the 
varying child care preferences parents could have for their 
kids, including faith-based providers. In your view, what role 
can faith-based providers play in increasing access to child 
care services?
    Ms. Sims. I think primarily it is to continue to 
participate in the program, and also, I think there is much 
more we can do to advertise to the faith community that--and 
CCDBG is a very unique program. You can participate in the 
program and not have to check your faith at the door. That is a 
crucial piece of what makes CCDBG such a unique program is that 
they can fully participate.
    That often we can put roadblocks up for faith providers, 
and they need to understand that this is a completely inclusive 
program for them.
    Mr. Harris. I appreciate that because in the past the 
proposals on the other side have tried to force faith-based 
institutions to choose between operating according to their 
sincere held beliefs, or maintaining access to Federal funds, 
and I think you make an excellent point. Mr. Chairman, I yield 
back.
    Chairman Kiley. Representative Adams of North Carolina is 
recognized.
    Ms. Adams. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to the 
witnesses for being here today, and for your testimony. After 
years of working families struggling to afford the costs of 
child care, I am glad to see that this Committee has finally 
decided to hold a meeting, a hearing on the subject.
    Child care is hard to find. It is even harder for working 
families to afford. This is a crisis, and Congress needs to 
work tirelessly to ensure that our children are cared for. What 
sort of solutions are Republicans bringing to the table? Well, 
the Department of Labor cut child care for its employees, and 
the President is not requesting any additional funding for Head 
Start.
    As Maya Angelou reminded us,''When someone shows you who 
they are, believe them.'' House Democrats are working to make 
child care more affordable, to ensure that child care workers 
can make the ends meet. We are introducing legislation, as you 
have heard, like the Child Care for Working Families Act 
because we understand that as Marian Wright Edelman said, that 
the future which we hold and trust for our own children, will 
be shaped by our fairness to other people's children as well.
    Dr. Friedman, child care professionals in a center earn an 
average of $33,140 per year. That puts many child care workers 
in the position of not being able to afford child care for 
their children.
    Can you tell us more about the child care workers in this 
country, and whether most of them can make ends meet based only 
on the money that they make from working in a child care 
center? How do these wages impact the childcare workforce?
    Ms. Friedman. Thank you. As you said, the child care 
workforce is one of the lowest paid professions in this 
country, despite the very essential and important work that 
they do every day for families and for this country. The real 
problem is that parents cannot pay higher fees, and providers 
can barely keep the staff that we have.
    In talking to providers over the past few years, you know 
what I heard over and over again, is they continue to lose 
staff to places like fast food or Costco, because those places 
pay better and have better benefits. Unless we address the 
wages of the child care workforce, we will not have enough 
child care in this country.
    Ms. Adams. Thank you. Because of low wages, many care 
workers rely on public assistance in order to survive. 
Researchers at Berkeley estimate that 43 percent of the child 
care workers, the families rely on some kind of public 
assistance like SNAP, or Medicaid to survive on these 
insufficient wages.
    Some of my colleagues across the aisle might be under the 
impression that recipients of Medicare or SNAP do not work, but 
that's just not true. Dr. Friedman, if cuts to Medicaid or SNAP 
made it impossible for childcare workers to make ends meet, 
what would you expect to happen, and would they be able to keep 
working, and now if those workers did not keep working, what 
would the impact be on child care costs and availability for 
other families?
    Ms. Friedman. I think the cuts, the proposed cuts to 
Medicaid and SNAP are very, very dangerous for the child care 
workforce. About 30 percent of childcare workers count on 
Medicaid. In expansion states, child care workforce has health 
insurance at four times the rate of states who did not expand, 
and so if those cuts go through, you are going to see that the 
workforce cannot make ends meet, and they will leave their 
child care jobs for other jobs.
    As a result, we will see the child care supply in this 
country go down.
    Ms. Adams. Thank you, ma'am. In your testimony, Dr. 
Friedman, you mentioned the Department of Government Efficiency 
cuts at the Office of Child Care. Could you provide more 
details about what those employees did to support the child 
care development fund, and how these firings will impact the 
administration of the childcare development fund?
    Ms. Friedman. Absolutely. Congress just recently gave the 
Office of Child Care the resources it needed to support 
implementation of CCDF, and those staff were doing a variety of 
things. One of the things that we heard from states is that the 
Office of Child Care was not responsive enough quickly with 
State questions, and that we needed more timely responses.
    We needed more timely monitoring, so that they knew what 
they were doing, and what they could be doing better. In 
addition, the five offices, regional offices that closed, those 
experts very closely worked with State agencies to maximize the 
State flexibility and State dollars.
    We lost all of that expertise and by cutting the staff by 
50 percent, everyone has to do another job. You cannot do the 
same job. You cannot support the program. You cannot oversee 
the program correctly.
    Ms. Adams. All right. Thank you very much. Mr. Chairman, I 
yield back.
    Chairman Kiley. I will now recognize myself for 5 minutes. 
Mrs. Codella Low, we have been talking today a lot about how--
about the economic consequences of parents having to drop out 
of the workforce because of the unaffordability of childcare, 
and then because you are not in the workforce, you become even 
more unable to afford child care, and it is the sort of vicious 
cycle.
    Conversely, I would have to imagine it's also true that 
there are families who actually delay having children because 
of the unaffordability and being able to access care. We know 
that this is a general trend in this country is delaying--I 
mean there are a lot of reasons for it, but I have to imagine 
this is one of them.
    Is there evidence for that? That this is one of the factors 
that is causing families to delay like expanding their family?
    Ms. Codella Low. I do not know that their--I cannot speak 
to that.
    Chairman Kiley. Do you have any evidence, Ms. Sims?
    Ms. Sims. I have seen some of these reports but have not 
read any of the research to validate that one way or another.
    Chairman Kiley. Yes. It seems that the goal is to be able 
to give people all the options they can, or to have to plan 
their families in the way that they would like, and then to 
balance that with their careers. That strikes me as what should 
be the goal when it comes to these issues of affordability.
    Another issue we have touched on repeatedly is the 
workforce challenges faced by childcare providers. You know, we 
are in this period of great transition in many industries, 
which is likely to accelerate in the next few years with 
advancements in AI, and other technology that will likely lead 
to the need for people to have career transitions.
    The child care industry is probably one that is going to be 
among the least affected because of the highly human and 
personal nature of that work, so is there an opportunity here 
to have job retraining type programs that will move people into 
the child care industry? I will give that to you as well.
    Ms. Codella Low. Sure. Thank you for the question. I will 
say that personally being the mom of two, child care was--is a 
major factor in affordability of childcare, it is a major 
factor. In most urban areas it is extremely challenging, but in 
terms of workforce, this is--I have to say that the Bipartisan 
Policy Center launched a Commission on the American workforce 
earlier this year, getting at exactly that.
    We are in a moment of great transition, and the skills 
necessary to take on any job requires a lot of time and 
attention at a Federal level, and also at a State and local 
level. These are some of the issues that we are tackling right 
now, thinking about how do you use opportunities to train and 
retrain workers to put them into or provide opportunities for 
them to matriculate into jobs that we know the economy will be 
able to sustain, and also sustain them.
    Chairman Kiley. Great. Yes, I think this is just a huge 
opportunity that could really help with a big element of this 
problem. Finally, Mayor Barton, very inspiring to see the work 
that you have done in your community. I am curious, you 
mentioned that the center that has been started is a 
collaboration on the private sector philanthropy and the local 
government, so what is sort of the role of the business 
community here?
    In that case it seems you kind of came together around a 
center that can be used in families. Seven employers provide 
sort of in-house services to employees if they are big enough, 
so how can we really create the right incentives for the 
business community to help with this problem?
    Mayor Barton. Well, this was born out of our annual visits 
with those businesses, and we repeatedly heard that the 
childcare issue was keeping people out of the workforce. There 
was also the realization that they were willing to invest on 
the health side, with the near site wellness clinic, so that 
was a moment for us to understand that maybe we could translate 
that to the child care site.
    Their involvement in this has been really on the 
fundraising and the sustainability side, so each of those 
businesses has committed at different levels for the initial 
construction, and the sustainability model. We sustain our 
center with ongoing funding. It is not a one time, and that is 
something we were very aware of as we created this model.
    We did not want to open a center and have it close 2 years 
later because it was not sustainable, so that piece is in there 
as well. That is the role of the businesses there. In exchange, 
their employees get priority seating, so they get to move to 
the top of the list, you know, because sometimes we have more 
requests than we have seats.
    They also get a seat on the governing board that oversees 
the center. We give them some say in how we operate it, but you 
know, we really rely on the professional input of the operator, 
and then the governing board there is really looking after the 
financial side of it. Businesses have to have a stake in this. 
They have to be involved, and it is about, you know, their 
success in our community as an employer, being able to attract 
and retain employees.
    You know, as we move forward, there is no single greater 
factor for these businesses that succeed than to think about 
the pipeline for tomorrow. I think they are investing in what 
is going to happen in 20 years.
    Chairman Kiley. Thank you very much. Representative Ansari 
of Arizona is recognized.
    Ms. Ansari. Thank you. Thank you so much to our witnesses 
for being here today. Very helpful testimoneys. It is no 
question that the cost of living has gone up much faster than 
wages over the years. Having one source of income is often 
extremely unrealistic, so for many families with young children 
they have to choose between either a second income or paying 
out for child care.
    I represent Phoenix, Arizona. In Arizona the price of 
center-based child care for two children is over $27,000 
annually, according to recent research by Child Care Aware of 
America. That is higher than the average cost of housing, and 
completely unrealistic in districts like mine where the average 
household income is only $87,000 per year, and much lower in 
many parts of the district.
    Family child care on the other hand, is significantly less 
expensive than center-based care. In Arizona, it is about 
$10,000 annually per child, versus $15,000 for center-based 
care. Dr. Friedman, can you talk about how those two types of 
care differ, and why a parent might choose one over the other? 
Why is family childcare important in this sector?
    Ms. Friedman. As I think all the panelists have said, I 
think it is really important that there are a lot of choices in 
the child care market for families to choose between. It is a 
very personal decision, where you put your baby while you are 
at work, and what might feel right to one parent feels very 
different to another.
    For some, the smaller size of a family childcare feels much 
more comfortable, for others they really like the structure of 
a center. I think it is really important that our child care 
policies support both--all of these different models, so that 
parents continue to have those choices.
    You know, one of the reasons family child care, the price 
is less, is because the person running it usually is doing 
multiple jobs, and so they are not taking a salary for 
themselves. You know, that is not necessarily a highlight of 
the model, and what we need to be doing is making sure that all 
of these different childcare settings are available for 
families, so they can make those decisions.
    Ms. Ansari. Thank you. Mrs. Codella Low, how can Congress 
help sustain and grow family child care through existing 
programs or new Federal investments?
    Ms. Codella Low. Yes, I think that as the panel has said 
today, choices are important for parents, as well as 
affordability, right? Both of these things go hand in hand. 
When any parent is looking at a center, or excuse me, an option 
for their child, they are looking at a lot of really important 
factors.
    You know, affordability lives in that. The other thing that 
Dr. Friedman just expanded on, is that a lot of parents feel 
really excited about the opportunity to be able to go to a 
neighbor or go to a family child care center. Giving the 
flexibility and allowing for parental choice in all of our 
methods, right, like this mixed delivery system is so important 
to our ability to provide the necessary care for all Americans.
    What we have right now in center-based care does not fit 
the need. What we have right now in family based does not fit 
the need. What we have in family friend and neighbor, all of 
these things together need to be a core component in thinking 
about choice and flexibility for parents to make the decisions 
that make the most sense for them.
    Ms. Ansari. Thank you. You know, we know from 2023 to 2024, 
that the number of licensed family childcare homes increased by 
4.3 percent. Again, according to Childcare Aware of America, 
this marks the first time in several years that we saw an 
upward trend in the number of licensed family childcare homes.
    I have also heard concerns that licensing standards, 
including those that are meant to ensure health and safety of 
all involved negatively impact those providers, and their 
ability to actually provide these childcare services. Dr. 
Friedman, one more question for you. Can you talk a little bit 
more about this impact?
    How can policymakers balance the need for health and safety 
without negatively impacting our childcare providers?
    Ms. Friedman. To be clear, I do not think it is the Federal 
regulations that are causing problems for family childcare 
providers in places. The Federal regulations very much support 
and promote family child care. I think states, it is always 
worth taking a look at regulations and making sure that they 
are right sized.
    In particular, making sure there are not barriers to 
business operation. That is different than deregulating for 
child health and safety which is something that should not 
happen. One of the conversations I had with family child care 
providers as Director of the Office of Child Care, is she was 
going to lose her business because of HOA policies.
    That is the type of thing that I do think that states need 
to be taking a look at and making sure that those barriers are 
out of the way for family child care, so that they can operate, 
and with investment, supply can grow.
    Ms. Ansari. Thank you so much. I know I am a little over 
time. I really appreciate it. I just--Mr. Chair, I would like 
to ask unanimous consent to enter the following Marshall Plan 
for Mom's report into the record, it is titled, ``The Business 
Case for Child Care, How Parent-Focused Employee Value 
Propositions Help Companies Win the War for Talent.''
    Mr. Thompson [presiding]. Without objection.
    [The information of Representative Ansari follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 
    
    Ms. Ansari. Thank you.
    Mr. Thompson. The gentlelady's time has expired. I now 
recognize the gentlelady from Illinois, Congresswoman Miller 
for 5 minutes.
    Mrs. Miller. Thank you Chairman and thank you to tall of 
our witnesses for being here today. I am so happy that I have 
been able to be a mom and a grandma, and I had the privilege of 
being able to, between my husband and me, be a caregiver for 
our own children.
    Unfortunately, this has become more of a luxury today, and 
I think young families are finding themselves in quite a 
predicament here. They have to find work outside the home to 
support their growing families, forcing them to secure 
childcare options during the day.
    Other families do have to make the difficult decision to 
forego the extra income, so one parent could stay home because 
childcare is simply too expensive. In my district, the median 
household income is just over $70,000, and childcare costs 
between $8,000 and $10,000 per child. In many cases, the 
average income cannot sustain two children in childcare, it is 
just not feasible.
    Republicans are working with President Trump to create a 
more affordable childcare system, specifically by creating more 
options for parents to use vouchers. Unfortunately, the Biden-
Harris administration had a long record of discriminating 
against faith-based organizations. Many childcare agencies are 
also local, and many parents choose to send their children to 
these organizations because they have a personal connection.
    Ultimately, our goal should be to make childcare so 
affordable that parents do not have to decide between caring 
for their children or working multiple jobs. Mrs. Low, in 2021, 
your organization released a report entitled, ``Examining the 
Role of Faith-Based Childcare.''
    Could you talk more about the importance of faith-based 
childcare, and why parents should have it as a choice?
    Ms. Codella Low. Yes, and I think what we found is that 
parents use faith-based providers. Often, we know that they are 
a part of a working mixed delivery system, and I think that 
that is, you know, the crux of the report shows that parents 
are making choices. Making choices that work best for them, and 
for their families, and we also know that access, 
affordability, reliability, high-quality are all factors that 
parents are looking at in order to make these decisions.
    Faith-based providers only add to a mixed delivery system 
that we know is necessary to provide the seats for the kids 
that need spots.
    Mrs. Miller. Absolutely. I am a firm believer that 
competition drives quality up, and price down. Ms. Sims, could 
you explain how applying this principle to child care will 
benefit parents, children, and local economies?
    Ms. Sims. Well, I think just choice in general is always, 
you know, a good driver toward competition and choice, because 
if I cannot find it here, I will go look elsewhere. You know, 
and the faith-based providers are there, family and child care 
providers there, I think with everyone knows we have talked 
about, it is all looking at how do we support like all of these 
boats to float, and to support them, and that we are not 
prejudicing one over the other.
    That is going to be a variety of techniques that we look 
at.
    Mrs. Miller. Right, and the children are unique, families 
are unique, and I think it was a shame that faith-based child 
care was discriminated against. Mayor Barton, in my district it 
is quite rural, much like your town of Crawfordsville, we are 
kind of close actually. What is your message to policymakers 
who underestimate the economic consequences of ignoring rural 
childcare access?
    Mayor Barton. Well, we are in a battle for population. A 
battle for population to maintain our workforce that is the tax 
base for these rural communities. Whether that is agriculture, 
manufacturing, whatever it might be, and without the child care 
piece, rural America starts to suffer.
    We are already going through that. We have been in my 
community for a number of years. I think we have turned the 
corner, but it has a profound economic impact. The data has 
shown that time and time again you lose business, you lose 
industry, you lose productivity.
    Then ultimately you lose, you know, spending power in your 
community and your tax base. It is a vicious cycle once you 
start down that path. As I said earlier, it is all about the 
economies of scale, and rural communities are at such a 
disadvantage when it comes to standing up child care providers, 
or centers, that we really struggle.
    Mrs. Miller. Right. Rural communities are a wonderful place 
to raise children. I so enjoyed your biography, and I 
appreciate that you are a problem solver, and you are looking 
outside the box and doing great things in your community. Thank 
you so much.
    Mayor Barton. Thank you.
    Mrs. Miller. I yield back.
    Chairman Kiley. Representative Hayes of Connecticut is 
recognized.
    Mrs. Hayes. Thank you. Good morning, and thank you to our 
witnesses for testifying today. Access to child care is 
essential for parents to get an education or to enter the 
workforce. The child care industry was dramatically impacted by 
the pandemic as we all know. Between February 2020 and April 
2020, the number of employees in child care centers abruptly 
dropped from just over 1 million workers, to around 670,000.
    Democrats tried to shield the industry from the worst 
economic impacts, including a supplemental injection of 15 
billion in discretionary dollars into the child care 
development fund, and 24 billion for childcare stabilization 
grants, which allowed child care providers to stay afloat.
    When we were debating the Build Back Better reconciliation 
package, I was someone who strongly supported the expansion of 
universal PreK, and child care was central to that 
conversation. Addressing the high cost of child care has 
consistently been a top priority for me.
    I introduced the Prospect Act, which expanded child care in 
community colleges, and brought back CPF funds to my district 
for child care incubators to develop and train business owners. 
Addressing this issue is something that I've tried to approach 
from every angle.
    Today I want to talk about some of those grants. According 
to an article published in the New Republic, the top 11 chains, 
almost all of which are backed by private equity or publicly 
traded, serve only about 12 percent of the 7.5 million children 
who attend center-based care centers every day.
    As we know, these firms have an obligation to their 
stakeholders and have to generate revenue. For example, 
disclosures reveal that between 2012 and 2017, KinderCare, 
which is one example, closed 380 ``under performing centers'' 
to increase revenue and enrollment at its remaining centers.
    For this reason, I believe that additional investments in 
the private child care sector must come with some type of 
guardrails. Dr. Friedman, why is it important that these 
centers, which are often labeled ``under performing'' in terms 
of revenue, are located in low-income-neighborhoods?
    Ms. Friedman. I think we are just beginning to understand 
what this type of for-profit program, how it is operating in 
various communities. States are--some states are trying to look 
at some guardrails. I think there-are concerns that a program 
might be answering to stakeholders instead of to families, and 
what that might mean for the services that they are delivering.
    I think states are beginning to experiment with those 
guardrails that you are speaking of, and I think there are 
important lessons to be learned there.
    Mrs. Hayes. How does consolidation within the market impact 
the availability of childcare slots in these communities?
    Ms. Friedman. I think we see quite clearly that what we 
need to be doing across this country in every single community 
is growing the supply, and anything that is reducing the supply 
takes us farther away from what families need.
    Mrs. Hayes. Thank you. In 2024, the Biden administration 
finalized a rule to update the child care and development fund, 
CCDF, those regulations and support child care quality and 
accessibility in communities all across the country. The 
biggest changes in the final rule included capping family co-
payments at 7 percent of family income, but allowing states to 
eliminate co-payments for more families, improving payment 
practices by ensuring providers are paid upfront requiring 
states and territories to provide at least some child care 
services through grants or contracts, and streamlining family 
eligibility.
    Dr. Friedman, what would repealing the 2024 Rule mean for 
most child care operations during this crisis?
    Ms. Friedman. Repealing that rule is going to mean less 
stable child care operations, which is going to mean less 
supply, which means less availability for child care. It is 
also going to mean increased prices for parents. It would be a 
tragic mistake to repeal that rule.
    Mrs. Hayes. Thank you. I know we have heard a lot about 
parents having a choice in child care, and I think that is 
absolutely what we want, but I know personally that for many of 
those parents, that choice comes down to quality and 
affordability. That is the biggest thing that we need to 
address.
    I think that availability of more locations, whether they 
be private centers, community-based, family based, whatever, 
that there are available slots, and that they have the ability 
to pay for that care because no parent wants to think that they 
are compromising care for their child because they had to opt 
for something just because of the cost, and with that I yield 
back.
    Chairman Kiley. The Chairman of the Full Committee, 
Representative Walberg of Michigan is recognized.
    Mr. Walberg. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thanks to the panel 
for being here. This is a crucial, crucial topic. This is not 
the same issues as when I was a boy back in the last century. 
This is something that is extremely important for all that we 
do in education, as well as in the workforce, so thank you for 
your written testimoneys that are very helpful.
    Mrs. Codella Low, you know, in times now that we are 
seriously looking here in this Congress with the debt, 
increasing debt, deficits that are going on, it forces us to 
consider everything in light of that. I guess I would ask the 
question how can taxpayer funds at the Federal level be used 
more effectively, not just more extensively, to promote 
innovative childcare solutions?
    Mrs. Codella Low. Yes. Thank you for the question. I think 
that one thing that I think every single panelist stated, and 
every member stated was how important child care is to our 
economic infrastructure. Thinking about child care is a real 
economic mobility.
    You know, of course, any investment of funds requires the 
need for us to think about these efficiently and think about 
how we can create innovative solutions. I think, you know, even 
sitting next to Mayor Barton here, who has looked at a problem 
in his city, and figured out a way to braid funding, both from 
the Federal, from the State, and from the local level to create 
a sustainable solution for his community and to really meet the 
need of his workforce is a great example.
    One that is unique to Crawfordsville but is not unique to 
the United States. There are so many examples in states like 
Michigan, the TriShare program that exists, where they are 
braiding, they are finding opportunities to braid funding and 
create not only access, but affordability for kids.
    Mr. Walberg. Giving more opportunity for flexibility to the 
locals.
    Mrs. Codella Low. Exactly.
    Mr. Walberg. Okay, okay. I appreciate that. Ms. Hartman 
Sims, do you believe the current child care landscape offers 
sufficient room for parental choice, which is big in my book, 
and if not, how can policy improve that in the area of parental 
choice?
    Ms. Sims. At the Federal level, the Child Care Development 
Block Grant is incredibly inclusive of a variety of providers 
that I mentioned earlier, including faith-based providers, who 
do not have to check their faith at the door.
    I think the area we need to be most cautious of on limiting 
choice, and this is much--this is really, this is a State 
issue, the expansion of universal PreK, which can sound lovely 
in concept, what a lot of the states are doing is limiting 
choice.
    They are pulling threes and fours out of this mixed 
delivery system that is inclusive of family child care and 
homes and faith-based providers, and all of that, and pulling 
them into a public-school setting, without the option of that 
parent having that choice. The other issue with that, with 
universal Pre-K is by pulling threes and fours out of community 
settings, we are disrupting actually making infant and toddler 
care more expensive for parents, versus less expensive.
    Mr. Walberg. Okay, okay. Thank you. Mayor Barton, we will 
move on from our discussion about motorcross of nations, and 
get on to this issue here, though I would love to discuss more. 
Crawfordsville has successfully collaborated with philanthropy, 
local and State government resources and businesses as well, 
very creative.
    How were you able to solicit this type of multifaceted 
commitment?
    Mayor Barton. You know, the first step was getting everyone 
to understand that this was a significant problem, and the data 
showed that. Once that data was available, I think we had 
everyone's attention. You know, the second piece was, you know, 
for everyone to understand they had a stake in this, and they 
had something to lose if we do not solve this.
    Businesses had something to lose. Philanthropy, you know, 
if you do not spend on early childhood education, you know, 
spend many times more dollars down the road trying to solve 
problems with our young people. Really convincing everybody 
that they had stake in this, and that there was a cost for them 
if we did not do something, and that they would be money ahead 
to address this early.
    I think it is putting all that together, and getting that 
buy-in, and then ultimately, you know, I think what we have 
done so well in our community is we come together 
collaboratively. It is bipartisan. It reaches across every 
sector of our community to really address these things. As I 
tell everybody when we get involved in this, you absolutely 
have to check your ego at the door.
    We require that, and we worked under that concept, and it 
gets us there.
    Mr. Walberg. If you could send this information on how to 
do that, we would love that. I yield back.
    Mayor Barton. Sure.
    Chairman Kiley. The Ranking Member of the Full Committee, 
Representative Scott. All right, well, I stand corrected. We 
are going to go to Representative Thompson of Pennsylvania, who 
will now have 5 minutes.
    Mr. Thompson. All right, Chairman, thank you, and thank you 
to you and the Ranking Member for this hearing. Thanks to all 
the witnesses who are here, incredibly important topic. Mayor 
Barton, proud to welcome a fellow former firefighter to the 
dais. I am not surprised at your leadership skills, having that 
shared value and experience.
    Do rural areas share a level playing field with urban areas 
in terms of addressing childcare needs. What are some of the 
pronounced differences?
    Mayor Barton. Well, I obviously cannot speak to the urban, 
you know, situation, but I will tell you from the rural 
perspective, we have a couple of challenges, and the first I 
touched on earlier, which is the economies of scale. As I 
mentioned in my written testimony, I initially thought this 
would be a pretty easy problem to solve, we will just recruit 
child care providers to come to our community, and you quickly 
discovered the numbers just are not there, so that is probably 
the big thing that we face.
    I think the other reality is that for most rural 
communities we do not have the resources to pursue all of the 
funding options, and we have talked a lot about grant funding 
and different types of funding. You have to have the human 
resources and the time and the ability to seek that out and 
successfully apply, and then administrate, if you are 
successful.
    Rural communities do not always have that. They often just 
leave it alone, and they do not even pursue those funding 
options, so both of those things work really against us in the 
rural communities. I think to a large extent, we feel like we 
have to solve this alone because we are kind of forgotten out 
there.
    Mr. Thompson. Well, as someone who represents a sort of a 
land mass of Pennsylvania, very rural counties, 18 counties, I 
mean I think transportation for parents to get to childcare is 
an issue as well. Is the child care in the direction of where 
the work setting is? I just--the math of very rural areas, you 
know, is there enough?
    I mean there are kids that we need child care for, but is 
there enough kids for someone in order to be able to form a--to 
successfully and financially, you know, put together a child 
care operation that works as well? I think those are also 
things in very rural areas that we obviously face as well. Can 
you speak to the link between child care access and population 
retention or growth in rural communities like yours?
    You did that a little bit. If you want to just expound on 
that a little bit because I mean we all, you know, we are 
always--those-of us from rural America, we want to be able to 
grow our population, right, to stop that export of young 
people.
    Mayor Barton. Yes.
    Mr. Thompson. What role does childcare play in that?
    Mayor Barton. Well, you know, I have said it several times 
today, but we are in a battle for population, and what we have 
seen in Indiana at least, is we see people moving from the more 
rural areas to the urban areas. There are several factors I 
think in their decision to do so.
    The reality is we are an industrial community. We are a 
manufacturing community, and to meet the workforce needs of my 
current employers, I have to grow the population at least 
modestly. If I am going to meet the needs of future employers, 
I have to add even additional growth there.
    I need to do two things. I need to attract new residents, 
and most importantly, I need to retain the next generation. We 
spend a lot of time in our community talking about that. If you 
want 20 something year olds starting careers and starting 
families in your community, child care is absolutely at the top 
of the list of needs in your community.
    Mr. Thompson. Child Care, rural broadband, housing, I mean 
because you need a workforce to be able to grow businesses and 
attract new ones. Ms. Sims, what are some examples where 
Federal roles or mandates have actually made it harder for 
families to access care, particularly rural families?
    Ms. Sims. Within like the programs that are under your 
committee's purview, I do not think there are, as others have 
said. The CCDBG program is predominantly a State administered, 
and locally implemented program. There are things in rural 
America that have been problematic.
    It is my understanding, and I am not an Ag expert, but 
there are some rules within USDA home loans, which is a 
predominate lender of home lending in rural America that you 
are not allowed to have a business inside, have a USDA rural 
home, a mortgage, if you are operating a business within that 
home.
    Which, if you are a family childcare home, you are 
invariably operating a business, and there has been legislation 
in past Congresses introduced to have USDA undo that rule, and 
that's not this Committee's jurisdiction, but I definitely 
think I have heard that in rural America. That is something 
that needs to be looked at.
    Mr. Thompson. Well, as Chairman of the House Agriculture 
Committee, I will take that back and look at that.
    Ms. Sims. Thank you.
    Mr. Thompson. There are a few archaic things I have found 
similar to that that we are trying to fix with this next farm 
bill. Chairman, thank you so much.
    Chairman Kiley. Thanks very much. Representative Owens of 
Utah is recognized.
    Mr. Owens. Thank you, Mr. Chairman for holding this 
hearing. I want to thank the witnesses for coming to testify on 
how access to affordable childcare is giving parents the 
flexibility needed to participate in the workforce. For several 
years I have been a champion of the childcare and development 
block grant, and the flexibility that it provides.
    I look forward to speaking to our witnesses and 
understanding how better to leverage that policy and support 
our parents and children. Mrs. Codella Low, we have 
acknowledged there is a nationwide deficit in the workforce 
participation. Based on your research, what is at stake for 
local economies and workforce participation when child care is 
unavailable or unaffordable?
    I am sure you were probably asked that already, but I would 
not mind if you would just extend yourself.
    Mrs. Codella Low. Oh, no, absolutely. I think you know 
there is a lot at stake when we do not have access to 
affordable, reliable high-quality child care, but the things 
that come to mind are reduction in workforce participation, 
loss of income, business disruptions, and I think this is 
something that has really rippled through the system in the 
last couple of years.
    Certainly, previously to my role at BPC I worked with the 
U.S. Chamber of Commerce Foundation and spent a lot of time on 
childcare issues there. Previous to the pandemic you did not 
hear a lot of business, you know, leaders talk about childcare 
as an issue that they were thinking about.
    Then all of a sudden, the pandemic hit, and we were talking 
about childcare often. Business disruptions are real. Decreased 
tax revenue in every single city, but certainly also in states, 
and then I think as Mayor Barton has also alluded to, a real 
disproportionate rural impact associated.
    Mr. Owens. Okay. Thank you so much. Mayor Barton, what was 
your catalyst for engaging businesses to help solve the 
childcare problem across Crawfordsville?
    Mayor Barton. Well, they were the first to illuminate the 
problem for us. They were the first to bring this to our 
attention. We were hearing this every year in our meetings with 
them. Then, you know, as the data became available, that I 
think was able to really bring it to the forefront of the 
conversation, and then really bringing them in as part of the 
solution was centered on those earlier conversations about the 
problems.
    It is much easier to walk in to the door with a proposed 
solution and ask for assistance when they have been telling you 
year after year that a problem exists. It is really through 
what I call our business retention and expansion program, which 
we focus on, you know, a great deal in our community.
    We visit every business annually. We visit our corporate 
headquarters, which are generally located in other cities every 
two to 3 years. It is through those candid conversations where 
they really share what's working in our community, and what is 
not working in our community, and where they are seeing issues.
    That really opened the door for this discussion and 
eventual solution.
    Mr. Owens. Yes, this is some indication why we are seeing 
this workforce deficit, so this is such a great conversation to 
have. Ms. Sims, how can Federal childcare policies ensure 
parental choice without picking winners and losers among the 
providers?
    Ms. Sims. Sure. I think the current Child Care Development 
Block Grant program, the Federal tax credits, as they are 
currently done, do not discriminate based on type of provider, 
faith-based, for-profit, nonprofit, you know, family, center-
based. I think you know, places you want to be concerned, and 
you know, there is--I can--Ms. Friedman, we have known each 
other for a number of years and there are times that we are 
going to agree.
    A lot of times sometimes we do not, you know, we disagree. 
I am concerned about the provision that was included in the 
CCDF regulations requiring states to use some portion on grants 
or contracts. You know, I understanding trying to deal with the 
lack of care in other, you know, in some areas, but when 
government is going into a grant or contract, versus a voucher 
or certificate to parents, it inevitably tends to prioritize 
one type of provider over another.
    I think you know, since CCDBG has been in existence, it has 
always been about parent choice. I am concerned about that 
provision in the current final regulations that I believe will 
limit choice, not increase choice.
    Mr. Owens. Okay. We will make sure we take a good look at 
it, because choice is really what it is all about, parents' 
choice, so thank you so much. It is a timely conversation, and 
looking forward to being part of the solution, so thank you so 
much. Chairman, I yield back.
    Chairman Kiley. Thank you very much. Ranking Member Scott 
is now recognized.
    Mr. Scott. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mayor Barton, you had a 
lot of success in expanding capacity, you said 30 percent 
increase. One of the successes was Camp Milligan, can you tell 
us a little bit about that, the age of the children, how many 
children were inthe program, and how much it costs?
    Mayor Barton. Yes. Camp Milligan is a summer day camp, and 
one of the things that we had noticed is that we were dealing 
with the early learning piece of this, the preschool type, you 
know, piece of this. We really realized at some point to that 
we had a big issue with school age children in the summer, and 
on breaks.
    We started Camp Milligan to help address that. We have also 
helped support other programs in our community, and you're 
talking about those children that, you know, are not able to 
care for themselves safely, but still need care in the summer 
and are out of school.
    Camp Milligan is a combination funding from the city. Our 
Montgomery County Community Foundation, we operate it through 
our parks and rec department. They have since expanded. We have 
a program over winter break, over Christmas break to help with 
childcare then for school aged children.
    It is really pulling all of that together to create that 
while in addition we are supporting other programs such as the 
Boys and Girls Club.
    Mr. Scott. How much did it cost?
    Mayor Barton. I do not have those numbers in front of me. I 
would say, you know, probably in the neighborhood of about 
$10,000 for the summer. It is pretty affordable. We are paying 
the staff.
    Mr. Scott. How many students?
    Mayor Barton. I do not have the numbers in front of me. I 
am going to guess probably about 40 students.
    Mr. Scott. Okay. Did the city appropriate any money for 
other childcare programs?
    Mayor Barton. What we have done is participate in the 
hiring of the early learning director to support the other 
programs, so that director is out there every day helping them 
with the business model, with personnel matters, with 
regulatory issues, and so on. We participate in that through 
the Montgomery County Community Foundation, so no direct 
funding has gone to any other providers, just channeled through 
the foundation.
    Mr. Scott. Has the community foundation put money into it?
    Mayor Barton. Yes, they do.
    Mr. Scott. Okay. Dr. Friedman, we have heard a lot about 
the faith--based organizations, and it's my understanding that 
faith-based-providers have always been a major participant in 
childcare programs, including Head Start and CCDBG. Is that 
true?
    Ms. Friedman. It is absolutely true.
    Mr. Scott. When you talk about them not participating or 
being barred, that is just not true.
    Ms. Friedman. That is simply false.
    Mr. Scott. Okay. Can you tell us why subsidies are 
necessary for child care to be affordable?
    Ms. Friedman. Subsidies are necessary because the math does 
not work in child care. Parents cannot cover what providers 
actually need to pay their staff, and so if there are not--if 
there is not child care assistance, we are never going to have 
the child care we need in this country.
    Mr. Scott. For infants, the ratio of teachers to students 
is 4 to 1, so essentially each student has to support a fourth 
of the teacher's salary before you get to the other expenses.
    Ms. Friedman. That is right. States set teacher child 
ratios, not the Federal Government. Many states set it at 1 to 
4, and infant care is more expensive because inherently it is 
more labor intensive.
    Mr. Scott. You cannot get away from that arithmetic?
    Ms. Friedman. You should not want to get away from that.
    Mr. Scott. We have heard a lot about deregulation. What 
happens to safety if child care is deregulated?
    Ms. Friedman. Health and safety regulations are extremely 
important. Children need a lot of care and attention, and 
parents do not want their children warehoused by untrained 
individuals.
    Mr. Scott. What happens if you do not have those 
regulations, what happens to the children?
    Ms. Friedman. You will have more safety incidents. Children 
will be less safe.
    Mr. Scott. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Chairman Kiley. Thank you very much. The Ranking Member is 
now recognized for a closing statement.
    Ms. Bonamici. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you to the 
witnesses, I mean this is an excellent discussion, and a place 
where we all acknowledge that there is a challenge. We all 
agree, Mr. Chairman, and colleagues that parental choice is 
important. There is no question here that Democrats are pro-
choice.
    As we heard today, families across the country are 
struggling to find high-quality, affordable child care. This is 
not a new challenge or a new problem. Think back to the 
pandemic, brings back a lot of bad memories, but during the 
first 8 months of the pandemic alone, 166,000 childcare jobs 
were simply lost across the country.
    Child care employment is now slightly above pre-pandemic-
levels, which is great, but we know that the childcare crisis 
still remains, as families struggle to find and afford care. It 
is acutely felt by families and is growing more urgent by the 
day. It is not just families, as we heard in the testimony.
    It is not just families feeling the impact. It is child 
care workers who are overwhelmingly women, women of color, and 
immigrants. They make poverty level wages. The U.S. economy 
loses 122 billion dollars every year as a direct result of the 
scarcity of affordable childcare.
    As Dr. Friedman testified, there simply is no market 
solution. We know that without robust Federal investment, the 
cost of care will keep rising, and workers who provide the 
essential care will continue to be among the lowest paid 
workers. These are the same caregivers who help shape the 
future of our children.
    They deserve better, and until wages are increased, the 
recruitment and retention challenges will remain. 
Unfortunately, instead of addressing this crisis directly, many 
congressional Republican proposals, combined with the harmful 
policies from the Trump administration, are going to make 
things worse.
    Since the beginning of the year Head Start, in particular, 
has faced numerous challenges, from being unable to use Federal 
funds, the closure of five of the 12 Head Start regional 
offices that provide crucial support to programs across the 
country. These actions have helped make life more challenging 
for families with young children.
    I know that anybody that has ever been in a Head Start 
program, knows that they also involve families. It is a very 
good investment. I also want to note, Mrs. Codella Low 
recommended improving data collection. I think that would be 
wonderful, but unfortunately, the Trump administration and the 
Department of Labor are trying to eliminate, completely 
eliminate, the Women's Bureau at the Department of Labor, where 
they do the data collection.
    The national data base of childcare prices, that is 
critical information that we need. Some colleagues have turned 
to deregulation as a solution, as we just heard, that is not an 
answer. Plus, importantly, research shows that there is no 
correlation between State regulation and childcare supply.
    We even have bipartisan support for strong standards in 
childcare settings. I am a mom. This is important. The last 
child care and development block grant reauthorization included 
updated health and safety standards for childcare centers. We 
need to continue focusing on what we know works, increasing 
investment in childcare is the key to building quality 
childcare supply, and improving affordability.
    We should take action. I am glad that we talked about this, 
but we should take action about the need for greater 
investments. For years we have had bipartisan support for 
funding the child care and development block grant at 12.4 
billion, yet Congress has not funded the program at this level.
    Congress must also pass legislation, for example, the 
Childcare for Working Families Act, that would cap childcare 
costs for working families at 7 percent of income and make the 
investments we need. I also want to note that there are other 
policies that would address this issue, like joining the rest 
of the world in offering paid family leave.
    When we hear the statistics about the additional cost for 
infant care, and look at the numbers, I do not have the exact 
numbers, but the number of women who go back to work within 
weeks of having a child, not because they want to or feel up to 
it, because they have to.
    The rest of the world offers paid family leave. That makes 
a tremendous difference. I have a bill called Build Housing 
with Care Act that would give grants to affordable housing, so 
we can build the child care center at the affordable housing, 
again reducing costs and stress for families.
    There are a lot of policies we could look at to address 
this challenge. We have the opportunity, and we have the 
responsibility to act for families, for children, for workers 
and for the economy. The time to invest in child care is now. 
Thank you again for the excellent discussion, and I yield back.
    Chairman Kiley. Thanks very much. Thank you very much to 
the witnesses for your compelling testimony. I think that we 
can all agree that the ability to start your family and pursue 
your career on your own terms is central to the American dream.
    Because of the cost of childcare, and limited 
accessibility, too many parents are faced with the wrenching 
dilemmas. To the extent that we can find solutions that will 
ease those dilemmas, we will therefore make the American dream 
more of a reality for more families.
    At the same time, as we have heard throughout today's 
testimony, this is an issue that is very much connected to the 
success of local economies, and our broader national economy. 
Mrs. Codella Low used the term essential infrastructure to 
describe childcare, which at first glance you do not really 
think of childcare the same way you think about roads or power 
lines, or something like that.
    I think that it actually is an apt term because it is just 
as foundational in a sense to being able to have a functioning 
and flourishing economy. I think a few takeaways from today's 
hearing, based on all the questions and testimony from the 
witnesses are No. 1, that choice and flexibility must remain 
the central pillars of the system, this mixed delivery model 
that Ms. Sims talked about.
    In a similar vein, Federal support ought to give local 
communities and governments flexibility in terms of what form 
that support takes, as Mayor Barton has testified for example, 
a rural community like his may not have the same economy of 
scale to support the same options as an urban community.
    We also discussed the workforce challenges that are faced 
by childcare providers, and there may be room here for things 
like licensing reform, credentialing reform, and certainly, 
with economic dislocations affecting some sectors in the years 
ahead. I think there will be an opportunity to utilize job 
retraining as well to assist with recruitment for that sector.
    I think that we also had come to some agreement that the 
solutions here really need to be multifaceted, and draw upon 
support from local communities, from State governments, from 
philanthropy, and from the business community. I think in many 
cases the business community is very much interested in 
collaborating and finding solutions in order to allow their 
employees to balance work and family life.
    Then finally, I think it is really important that this be 
an issue we can approach from a bipartisan perspective. This 
affects millions and millions of families. It does not matter 
their political views, and I think there really is a lot of 
common ground here. I look forward to working with my 
colleagues on both sides of the aisle to find solutions the 
rest of this Congress.
    Thanks very much. With there being no further business, the 
Subcommittee stands adjourned.
    [Whereupon, at 12:11 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
    [Additional submissions from Representative Scott follows:]
    [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 

    [Questions and responses submitted for the record by Dr. 
Friedman follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] 

                                 [all]