Donald Trump rolled out a plan Tuesday aimed at making child care more affordable, guaranteeing new mothers six weeks of paid maternity leave and suggesting new incentives for employees to provide their workers childcare. Spurred on by his daughter, Ivanka, Trump waded into topics more often discussed by Democrats.
Trump unveiled the proposals in a speech in a politically critical Philadelphia suburb as he tries to build his appeal with more moderate, independent voters — especially women. Child care is one of the biggest expenses many American families face, surpassing the cost of college and even housing in many states.
“We need working mothers to be fairly compensated for their work, and to have access to affordable, quality child care for their kids,” Trump said in Aston, Pennsylvania. “These solutions must update laws passed more than half a century ago when most women were still not in the labor force.”
Trump proposed guaranteeing six weeks of paid maternity leave to employees whose employers don’t offer leave already. The campaign says the payments would be provided through existing unemployment insurance — though it has yet to spell out how the system would cover those costs.
Trump’s Democratic opponent, Hillary Clinton, has called for 12 weeks parental leave for both mothers and fathers paid for by taxes on the wealthy.
Trump previously proposed reducing child care costs by allowing parents to fully deduct the average cost of child care from their taxes. On Tuesday, he expanded that proposal to allow families with a stay-at-home parent to qualify for the deduction and to include costs associated with caring for elderly dependent relatives.
The deduction would apply only to individuals earning $250,000 or less, or $500,000 or less if filing jointly. But because Trump’s proposal is a tax deduction rather than credit, its greatest benefits would go to affluent households. More than 40 percent of U.S. taxpayers don’t make enough money to owe taxes to the federal government, meaning they would not benefit from a deduction. Lower-income earners would receive child-care spending rebates through expanding the existing Earned Income Tax Credit, the campaign said.
Trump also proposed incentives for employers to provide child-care options at work. But some of his proposals to prod businesses and communities into providing childcare and other services are anathema to conservative orthodoxy.
At one point, Trump was interrupted briefly by a crying baby — but, unlike at a rally in August, he did not suggest he wanted the child ejected.
The timing, location and subject matter are no coincidence. Democratic presidential candidates have won Pennsylvania since 1992, but Trump hopes to flip the battleground to win the White House in November. And Trump has been trying to soften his image among college-educated women who have been reluctant to support a candidate who has made many derogatory remarks toward women.
Ivanka Trump introduced Trump in Pennsylvania and, earlier in the day in Iowa, the candidate credited his daughter for his action on the issue. “She is the one who has been pushing for it so hard: ‘Daddy, Daddy we have to do this.’ She’s very smart, and she’s right,” the candidate said.
The timing raised some eyebrows among skeptics.
Carmel Martin at the liberal Center for American Progress said the new savings accounts would create a potential tax shelter for wealthy people and that Trump’s proposals remain tilted to the rich because the low-income child-care rebates top out at $1,200.
“It would definitely work for Ivanka, but not for most American families,” Martin said.
Trump laid out plans to create “Dependent Care Savings Accounts” that would allow families to set aside money to look after children or elderly parents. The accounts would allow tax-deductible contributions and tax-free appreciation and could be used to pay for child care, after-school programs and school tuition. To help lower-income parents, the government would match half of the first $1,000 deposited per year.
For elderly dependents, the accounts could be used to help pay for services including in-home nursing and long-term care.
Currently, families can set aside up to $5000 annually for child care expenses or elder care but not for school tuition and cannot carry over the amount in the account.
Trump did not lay out how much the proposals would cost, but insisted the extra spending would be offset by economic growth and other cuts.
Clinton, meanwhile, proposes that no family should spend more than 10 percent of its income on child care. To achieve this, Clinton would seek to boost federal spending on child-care subsidies and provide “tax relief for the cost of child care to working families.” Those benefits would be offered on a sliding scale based on need, though Clinton has offered few other details since introducing the plan in May.
The Associated Press contributed to this article.
Only a man (TRUMP) would decide that a new mother needs 6 weeks maternity leave. In Canada new Mothers go on EMPLOYMENT INSURANCE one month before birth and remain on EMPLOYMENT INSURANCE for 1 full year, which makes perfect sense. As most mothers are breast feeding their new babies and this would be very difficult if they had to take their children to work with them. That is unless some BIG organizations have day care available. So TRUMP get a life you know NOTHING about being a NEW MOTHER. I might suggest your are another type of MOTHER.
Of course offering women any time off that men don’t get, let alone paid time – heaven forbid a year as Lorna suggests would utterly destroy any hopes women have of earning equal pay and equal status in the workplace. Why would any company choose to employ women with that type of added expense attached to them? And simply saying “unemployment insurance pays for it” shows total ignorance of how those premiums are computed. “Unemployement insurance” isn’t really insurance but a form of deferred billing wherein the employer pays back the insurer over the course of five years for any payouts on the policy.
Someone will have to pay for the paid maternity leave proposals. Part of our problems currently is that our government mandates that someone else pay or they pay out of the federal government for a variety of programs that rewards people for not producing income. We already have a government that is deep in debt and we have employers that are being crushed by rising employee health care costs. Make no mistake nothing is free. Someone will get stuck with the bill for any paid leave.
President Obama thought he was helping part time workers by mandating their employers to provide health insurance. What he didn’t count on was the employers cutting the part time workers hours below the insurance threshold. The part timers didn’t get health care; they got their work hours cut.
These programs always sound great but they usually come with unintended consequences which leave people worse off. If paid maternity leave becomes law more employers may chose to hire a guy or women past child bearing age rather than a 20 something year old woman.