[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 162 (2016), Part 2]
[Senate]
[Pages 1635-1636]
[From the U.S. 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.
  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

[[Page 1636]]

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 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.

                          ____________________