[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 124 (Thursday, September 17, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Pages S10518-S10520]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. WELLSTONE:
  S. 2489. A bill to amend the Child Care and Development Block Grant 
Act of 1990 and the Higher Education Act of 1965 to establish and 
improve programs to increase the availability of quality child care, 
and for other purposes; to the Committee on Labor and Human Resources.


                         child development act

  Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, right now in our country there are 
about 10 million children--of course, when I talk about children, I am 
talking about their parents as well--who are eligible for good 
developmental child care opportunities. As it turns out, we provide 
assistance to 1.4 million out of this 10 million. In other words, fully 
86 percent of children who are eligible to receive some assistance so 
that they will get better child care in those critical early years 
receive no assistance at all.
  I introduce today this piece of legislation, which I have called the 
Child Development Act. I have been working on it for the last year and 
a half. Altogether, over the next 5 years, it calls for $62 billion, 
about $12 billion--less than 1 percent of the budget--to be invested in 
the health, skills, intellect and character of our children.
  About $37.5 billion just increases funding for the Child Care and 
Development Block Grant Program (CCDBG), which has been a proven 
success in providing more money so that we can expand child care in our 
States and provide help to many working families that need this help.
  In addition, the bill provides funding for improving afterschool 
programs. We have funds that are set aside to improve the quality of 
child care. Children Defense Fund studies have shown that six out of 
seven child care facilities in this country provide only poor-to-
mediocre service, and one out of eight centers actually put children at 
risk.
  There is additional funding for professional training, for new 
construction, and I say to my colleagues, there is also funding for 
loan forgiveness, which is the effort that I have been working on with 
my colleague, Senator DeWine from Ohio, so that those men and women who 
do their undergraduate work and receive training in early childhood 
development, where the wages are so low, at least will receive loan 
forgiveness which will help them. Finally, there is some $13 billion in 
tax credits for low- and middle-income working parents to help them 
afford child care.
  Research has shown that much of what happens in life depends upon the 
first three years of development. The brain is so profoundly influenced 
during this time that the brain of a three-year-old has twice as many 
synapses (connections between brain cells) as that of her adult 
parents. The process of brain development is actually one of 
``pruning'' out the synapses that one does not need (or more 
accurately, does not use) from those that become the brains standard 
``wiring.'' This is why the first three years of development are so 
important--this is the time that the brain must develop the wiring that 
is going to be used for the rest of one's life. According to a report 
on brain development published by the Families and Work Institute, 
``Early care and nurture have a decisive, long lasting impact on how 
people develop, their ability to learn, and their capacity to control 
their own emotions.'' If children do not receive proper care before the 
age of three, they never receive the chance to develop into fully 
functioning adults.
  We are not allowing our children a chance in life when we do not 
provide them with proper care in their early years. If America is to 
achieve its goal of equal opportunity for our children, we need to 
start with proper care in their early years. It is a painful statistic 
then that our youngest citizens are also some of the poorest Americans. 
One out of every four of our country's 12 million children under the 
age of three live in poverty. It becomes very difficult to break out of 
the cycle of poverty if poor children are not allowed to develop into 
fully functioning adults.
  Yet many parents in America do not have the option of providing 
adequate care for their children. For parents who can barely afford 
rent it is nearly impossible to take advantage of the Family Medical 
Leave Act, and sacrifice 12 weeks of pay in order to directly supervise 
a child. Many mothers need to return to work shortly after giving birth 
and find that the only options open to them are to place their children 
in care that is substandard, even potentially dangerous--but 
affordable. According to the Children's Defense Fund, six out of seven 
child care centers provide only poor to mediocre care, and one in eight 
centers provide care that could jeopardize children's safety and 
development. The same study said that one in three home-based care 
situations could be harmful to a child's development. How can we abide 
by these statistics?
  This is a serious problem, and frighteningly widespread. The 
eligibility levels set for receiving child care aid through the federal 
Child Care and Development Block Grant (CCDBG) is 85 percent of a 
state's median income. Nationally, this comes out to about $35,000 for 
a family of three in 1998. However, according to the Children's defense 
fund, fully half of all families with young children earn less than 
$35,000 per year. Half! A family that has two parents working full time 
at minimum wage earns only $21,400 per year. This is not nearly enough 
to even dream of adequate child care.
  Child care costs in the United States for one child in full day care 
range from $4,000 to $10,000 a year. It is not surprising that, on 
average, families with incomes under $15,000 a year spend 23 percent of 
their annual incomes on child care. And in West Virginia, if a family 
of three makes more than that $15,000, they no longer qualify for child 
care aid! In fact, thirty-two states do not allow a family of three 
which earns $25,000 a year (approximately 185 percent of poverty) to 
qualify for help. Only four states in our nation set eligibility cut 
offs for receiving child care assistance at 85 percent of median family 
income, the maximum allowed by federal law. There is obviously not 
enough funding to support the huge need for child care assistance in 
our nation, and that is why I am proposing the Child Care Development 
Act.
  There is widespread support for expanded investments to improve the 
affordability and quality of child care. A recent survey of 550 police 
chiefs found that nine out of ten police chiefs surveyed agreed that 
``America could sharply reduce crime if government invested more in 
programs to help children and youth get a good start'' such as Head 
Start and child care. Mayors across the country identified child care, 
more than any other issue, as one of the most pressing issues facing 
children and families in their communities in 1996 survey. A recent 
poll found that a bipartisan majority of those polled

[[Page S10519]]

support increased investments in helping families pay for child care--
specifically, 74% of those polled favor a bill to help low-income and 
middle-class families pay for child care, including 79% of Democrats, 
69% of Republicans, and 76% of Independents.
  It is clear that many like to talk about supporting our children, and 
many are in favor of supporting our children, but what action is 
actually taken? Yes, the addition of new child care dollars in 1996 has 
helped welfare recipients, but it has done nothing for working, low-
income families not receiving TANF. The Children's Defense Fund 
recommends that Congress pass comprehensive legislation that guarantees 
at least $20 billion over five years in new funding for the Child Care 
Development Block Grant (CCDBG). My Child Care Development Act goes 
beyond this, yet even my bill is just a first step. This bill is 
designed to provide affordable, quality child care to half of the ten 
million American children presently in need of subsidized care. It will 
provide $62.5 billion over 5 years--$12.5 billion a year--nearly three 
times the amount proposed in the President's most ambitious, and still 
unprosecuted, proposal. In 1997 the President proposed extending care 
to 600,000 children from poor families, leaving fully 80% of eligible 
children without aid. That was the last we heard of it. And it wasn't 
good enough, anyway.
  If we are serious about putting parents to work and protecting 
children, we need to invest more in families and in child care help for 
them. Enabling families to work and helping children thrive means 
giving states enough money so that they can set reasonable eligibility 
levels, let families know that help is available, and take working 
families off the waiting lists.
  The Child Care Development Act will require $62.5 billion over five 
years. There will be several offsets necessary if we are serious about 
giving children in this country the type of care they need and deserve. 
Shifting spending from these offsets demonstrates that our true 
national priority is children, not wasteful military spending and 
corporate tax loopholes.
  The offsets that will be necessary are as follows. If we repeal the 
reductions in the Corporate Minimum Tax from the 1997 Budget Bill, we 
create $8.2 billion. The elimination of the Special Oil and Gas 
Depletion Allowance will make room for and additional $4.3 billion. An 
offset of $.575 billion will come from a repeal of the Enhanced Oil 
Recovery Credit and an offset of $13.767 billion will come from the 
elimination of exclusion for Foreign-Earned Income. From these four 
different offsets in tax provisions a sub total amount of $26.835 is 
created to spend on child care.
  Defense Cuts will also be necessary in the amount of $24.4 billion. 
This will come from canceling the F-22, a plane plagued with troubles, 
which will free up $19.29 billion, and $5.11 billion will come from a 
reduction in Nuclear Delivery Systems Within Overall Limits of START 
II.
  The remaining offsets can be made by reducing the Intelligence Budget 
by 5 percent, which would save $6.675 billion; by reducing Military 
Export Subsidies by $.85 billion; and by canceling the International 
Space Station, which costs $10.045 billion. All of which, when added 
together, allows for an additional $68.805 billion to be used to 
support our children.
  This is, finally, a child care bill on the same scope as the problem 
itself. We as a nation are neglecting the most vulnerable and important 
portion of our society--our children. Here is an ambitious solution to 
this vast problem that has been plaguing our country. So that we don't 
have to be a country that just talks about putting our children first.
  Mr. President, I want to speak a little bit from the heart. We are 
now at a point in our session where we have maybe 2\1/2\, 3 weeks to 
go. I think it is a tragedy that, in many ways, we are not involved in 
the work of democracy. From my point of view as a Senator from 
Minnesota, the work of democracy is to try to respond and speak to the 
concerns and circumstances of people's lives.
  As I travel around Minnesota and travel around the country, I believe 
that, more than anything else, what families are saying to us is, ``We 
want to do our very best by our kids, because if we as parents,'' or a 
single parent, ``can do our best by our kids, we will do our best by 
our country.''
  One of the reasons we--I am talking about the people now in the 
country--are so disillusioned about our political process, above and 
beyond all that they hear about every day, which I hate, is that all 
that is happening is no good for our country. I think the polls show 
this as well, people are saying, ``Get on with your governing, too; 
please govern; please be relevant and important to our lives.'' People 
feel like we are not doing that.
  I have to say that if we can respond to what most people are talking 
about, which is how we earn a decent living and how do we give our 
children the care we know they need and deserve, we will be doing well 
by people. If we can do everything that we can do as Senators, 
Democrats and Republicans, and if the private sector plays its role and 
we also engage in voluntarism and a lot of good things happen at the 
community level and non-Government organizations, and nonprofits play 
their role, and I say to Rabbi Shemtov, our guest chaplain today, the 
religious community needs to play their role: if we all do everything 
we can to enable parents or a parent to do their best by their kids, 
then that is the best single thing we can do.
  What saddens me and also angers me is that all of a sudden, the focus 
on children is just off the table. We have lost it. It wasn't that many 
months ago that we were having conferences and we were talking about 
reports that were coming out and we couldn't stop discussing the 
development of the brain; how important it is to make sure that we get 
it right for our children because by age 3, if we don't get it right 
for them, they are never going to be ready for school and never be 
ready for life.
  What happened? What happened to our focus? We have lost our focus. We 
have lost our way. We are talking a lot about values, and we are 
talking a lot about moral issues and we should--we should. But isn't it 
also a moral question or a moral issue that one out of every four 
children under the age of 3 is growing up poor in America today, and 
one out of every three children of color under the age of 3 is growing 
up poor in America today?
  With our economy still humming along, how can it be that we cannot do 
better? I don't understand that. I say to the Rabbi and Chaplain, in 
the words of Rabbi Hillel, ``If not now, when?''
  Here we are with 3 weeks to go to this Congress, and we haven't done 
anything to help families, to help children, to fill their void so that 
we make sure that every child who comes to kindergarten comes to 
kindergarten ready to learn. If we are going to talk about education, 
and we are going to have a discussion about education--maybe we won't 
on the present course--I think we have to focus on the learning gap.

  The truth of the matter is, we do quite well for kids in our public 
schools if they come to kindergarten ready to learn. It is the kids who 
come to kindergarten not ready to learn for whom we don't do well.
  I am not trying to take K-12 off the hook. We need to do much better. 
But couldn't we say that as a national goal we want to make sure that 
every child who comes to kindergarten comes to kindergarten ready to 
learn? So that she knows the alphabet. He knows colors and shapes and 
sizes. She knows how to spell her name. They have been read to widely 
and they come with the readiness to learn.
  The Presiding Officer, Senator DeWine, is as committed to children as 
any Senator in the Senate. He knows what I am saying.
  This is a cost-neutral bill. I will not go on about this bill's 
offsets. I cut into some tax loopholes and some subsidies that go to 
some of the largest corporations in America that do not need it. I 
raise some questions about whether we need some additional missiles and 
additional bombers. I redefine national security, and say, yes, we need 
a strong defense, but we need to take some of the money and invest for 
children. People can agree or disagree about where I get the money for 
this. Can't we agree that we take 1 percent of our budget and invest it 
in the

[[Page S10520]]

health and skills and character and intellect of our children? They are 
100 percent of our future.
  I must repeat this point. I cannot believe that not that many months 
ago we were all talking about development of the brain, early childhood 
development. We were all talking about legislation--we were all talking 
about how we were going to do something to help parents do better by 
their kids, and we are not doing that.
  That is why I introduce this legislation today. I do not think it is 
a cry in the wilderness, because I hope next year we are going to get 
this bill enacted. I am going to fight for this. And maybe, if I have a 
chance--I don't know that I will, given the next 3 weeks--I will bring 
some of it up as amendments. But we have to start speaking out about 
this, Mr. President. I say to Senator DeWine, the Presiding Officer, we 
have to start speaking out about this because we should be doing 
better.
                                 ______