[Congressional Record Volume 162, Number 24 (Wednesday, February 10, 2016)]
[Senate]
[Pages S806-S808]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
CHILD CARE ACT AND LEAD POISONING
Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I rise this evening to talk about
childcare, in particular one piece of legislation which I have
introduced today, S. 2539, but also to talk more broadly about the
critical need in our country for more options, more opportunities for
families--especially low-income families--to be able to afford high-
quality childcare. The bill that was introduced today is the Child Care
Access to Resources for Early Learning Act. Of course, the acronym or
shorthand for the bill is the Child CARE Act, standing for the words in
the bill that focus on resources and in particular resources for early
learning.
It is this Senator's belief, and I think the evidence is abundantly
clear over time whenever this issue is studied, that in terms of the
positive impact of early care and learning of a child, the evidence
tells us over and over again that if kids learn more now, they will
literally earn more later. That connection between learning and earning
is compelling, and I think it is an essential part of the debate. Early
education and care for a young child has an impact on all of our lives
when it comes to the economy.
We know now from the evidence that high-quality early learning
contributes to a reduction in need for special education. It also helps
to lower juvenile justice rates. It also helps to improve health
outcomes over time. It also increases high school graduation and
college matriculation rates.
For some children from low-income households, a lot of these studies
have also shown that by the age of 3, they will have heard 30 million
fewer words than their more affluent peers. Even before they enter
kindergarten, this so-called word gap means they are already far
behind. The income level of the household can often determine how many
words that child has heard in his or her lifetime. Of course, the
reason it is such a big number is because the words get repeated, but
even when you factor in the repeating of words over and over again,
just imagine how far behind they are if they are behind by 30 million
words. If it were 5 million words, that would be a substantial gap,
but, of course, it is much worse than that.
I believe and I think the evidence shows that in the decades to come,
the strength of our economy and the fiscal stability of our Nation will
depend on the viability and vitality of our future workforce. I think
that is evident from the research. But, again, that connection between
early learning and the earning potential of that individual is
abundant.
[[Page S807]]
Unfortunately, for many families, the need is still substantially
great. Just last fall, Pennsylvania alone had a waiting list of 7,000
families who qualified for childcare vouchers but did not receive them.
In other words, in one State there were 7,000 families who were
eligible for these vouchers and did not receive them. That story,
unfortunately, is playing out across the country. According to data
from the Department of Health and Human Services, less than 1 in 10
children nationwide under the age of 4 received childcare assistance.
In Pennsylvania it is about 15 percent. Just think about that--
nationwide, 1 in 10 is eligible for this kind of help and is not
receiving it.
Child Care Aware--one of the many groups who helped with the
legislation I just mentioned, the Child CARE Act--tells us that
particularly in urban and rural communities, there is a severe shortage
of high-quality or licensed childcare facilities.
In Pennsylvania, where we have a significant State investment in
childcare, only 3.5 percent of childcare slots for children birth to
age 4 years old are in the highest quality programs.
For many families who can even find care, the cost is very
burdensome. For most families, childcare is often the second most
costly expense, behind only housing. Just imagine that--the second
highest expense in the life of a family for far too many families is
childcare, second only to housing. In 2014, in more than half of the
United States, a year of childcare costs more than a year of college
tuition at a public college. That is another stunning comparison.
We hear it all the time from real people--not just numbers or
studies, we hear it from real people. Last week when we were discussing
the bill, the Child CARE Act, we heard from a Washington, DC,
Metropolitan Police officer who also happens to be a parent. Her name
is Zunnobia, and she told us how much there is a struggle for hard-
working, even middle-class families who just want the best for their
children, how difficult that struggle is to find quality, affordable
childcare for early care and learning. This police officer also told me
and told those in the room how all too often in her work as a police
officer, she sees teenagers or young people who did not have the
benefit of high-quality care and early learning.
This is another example from Pennsylvania. This is what Deanna, a
parent, tells us, and I am quoting just in part:
Each month, with two children in daycare, our payment
exceeded our mortgage payment.
So it is not the second highest cost but the highest cost in her
household.
Deanna continues:
Some months we paid for daycare with our home equity line
of credit. It took us 2 years to pay off the debt we
acquired. Parents with young children are really struggling.
It is a no-win situation.
That is what Deanna, a parent from Pennsylvania, tells us.
Christina, another Pennsylvanian, a parent, told us that the cost of
``daycare is bringing us straight to foreclosure because we cannot
afford our mortgage, groceries, diapers, and gas for our one car.''
So this is the real world and this is the real life of a struggling
family but especially struggling--even in a recovery--with the cost of
childcare.
Let me talk for a moment about the component parts of the act. The
Child CARE Act is legislation that will ensure that families with
infants and toddlers who are living at or below 200 percent of the
Federal poverty level, which we know is approximately $40,000 for a
family of three--it will help those families who need childcare have
access to that high-quality care. The act will further the purposes of
the child care and development block grant by raising quality standards
and by providing resources necessary to make those higher quality
standards a reality and available to families across the Nation. Over a
10-year period, we estimate that the legislation could help over 1
million additional children under the age of 4 gain access to high-
quality childcare.
Part of achieving higher quality care is ensuring that childcare
providers are receiving an appropriate level of support and that
childcare workers are compensated fairly for their expertise.
Unfortunately, across the Nation, the average childcare worker often
makes below poverty wages. According to the 2013 National Survey of
Early Care and Education, the median wage for center-based childcare
staff was $9.30 an hour, about $19,000 a year. Just imagine that. The
people who we believe are the best qualified and the most dedicated to
taking care of our children, who will give them that early care and the
learning that goes with it, the people whom we entrust with our most
treasured asset, our children, in too many places in this country,
those same workers are making just $19,000 a year. This means that
childcare workers on average make less than parking lot attendants,
less than manicurists, and less than massage therapists. So if we
really care about our children, I think we would pay them more than
some of the occupations I just mentioned. Caring for and nurturing
infants and toddlers requires specialized knowledge and competencies
that are not easily developed and should not be taken for granted.
I believe and I think most Members of Congress, either in the Senate
or in the House, believe that our children deserve quality. They
deserve quality care and learning, but they especially deserve the
quality that comes with someone who is paid an adequate wage and has a
level of expertise and competency to provide that child with the kind
of early care and learning she has a right to expect.
Childcare funding is critically important not only to families in
Pennsylvania and across the Nation, but, of course, it is critical if
we are going to meet that demand that our workforce must meet. The
children who learn more now will earn more later.
We also know that this legislation is an opportunity to finally, at
long last, make that historic commitment to these same families. We
know the return on investment, if that is all someone wants to focus
on, is return on investment. I know some people like numbers sometimes
better than testimonials from parents. But if your only concern is
return on investment, this is a good deal. Return on investment in
terms of high-quality early care and learning is as high as $17 for $1.
That is a pretty good deal anywhere in the country. We want to
emphasize the return on investment, but I also believe at the same time
that we have to focus on the life of that child and that child's
prospects for future employment to contribute to our economy.
We have to make this issue a priority. If we really care about
economic growth, GDP growth, competing in a world economy, and having a
skilled workforce, all those high aspirations, all those goals we talk
about a lot, it starts with early care and learning. A child cannot
earn what she should be able to earn if she doesn't have the
opportunity for early care and learning--high-quality early care and
learning.
We can spend up to $40,000 a year on incarceration and thousands on
drug treatment and/or special education or we can spend a small
fraction of that now on early care and learning and give children both
a healthy and a smart start in life.
I urge my colleagues, when it comes before them, to support the Child
CARE Act that has been introduced today.
Mr. President, let me conclude with some brief comments about another
related issue for our kids--lead poisoning.
What has happened in Flint, MI, is both horrific and inexcusable. No
one should accept any excuse for what happened there. I commend Senator
Stabenow and Senator Peters for shining a light on what occurred in
their home State.
But, unfortunately, this is an issue that involves not just the State
of Michigan, not just the city of Flint, this is a nationwide problem,
especially on the eastern seaboard. Unfortunately, many communities
around the country have numbers that are even worse, even higher than
the Flint numbers.
By one example, Pennsylvania--one of the largest States in the
Union--18 cities in Pennsylvania are reporting higher levels of lead
exposure among children than Flint. Let me say that again--higher
levels than Flint. In Flint, 3.2 percent of children exceeded the
danger threshold for lead exposure, tested levels of 5 or more
micrograms
[[Page S808]]
per deciliter of blood. So 5 or more micrograms is the danger level,
and Flint was at 3.2. Where were some cities in Pennsylvania that, as I
said, have higher numbers? Instead of being at 5 or 3.2, this is what
we see in Pennsylvania: Allentown, 23; Altoona, 20.5; my hometown of
Scranton, 20 percent; Philadelphia and Pittsburgh--our largest cities,
the two largest cities and the most urban parts of our State--were at
10 and 8 respectively, which is lower than the other Pennsylvania
cities but still higher than Flint. In Pennsylvania, the primary source
for childhood lead poisoning is not water but, rather, deteriorating
infrastructure and exposure to the remnants of lead-based paint, paint
dust, and chips. That is a problem in our State, but there are other
States, especially on the eastern seaboard, that have a similar
problem.
We must ensure that children who have been exposed to high levels of
lead receive all--and I mean that literally--all of the followup
services they need to reach their full potential. Whether that is
remedial, medical, or educational, we need to be there for those
children.
I supported funding for the Centers for Disease Control's Healthy
Homes and Lead Poisoning Prevention Program, which supports State and
local public health departments working to identify cases of childhood
lead exposure. But that is just but one step. We have a lot more to do
on this issue.
I will conclude by saying that we should take action on childcare to
make sure that it is affordable and that it is of a high quality so
that especially poor children can learn more now and earn more later.
It is very difficult to learn, grow, and succeed if you have the
disadvantage of not only not having childcare and early learning but
the additional burden of high levels of lead. These are challenges that
we face as a country, and these are challenges that both Houses and
both parties must confront.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alabama.
____________________