SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
families
Pushing to Eviscerate Head Start and SNAP, Trump Wants to Give Parents Medals for Having More Kids
Republicans, said one feminist writer, "don't care about making the world better, safer, or healthier for American families and children. They just want women to have more babies."
Apr 23, 2025
Political observers have warned that U.S. President Donald Trump has spent his first months in office "flooding the zone"—unleashing a torrent of executive actions and Republican proposals meant to overwhelm his opponents while furthering his right-wing agenda, including pushes to slash healthcare for more than 36 million children, eliminate funding for early childhood education, and weaken environmental justice initiatives.
But new reporting this week revealed that while taking significant actions that are expected to directly harm millions of children—and make the cost of living higher for parents across the country—White House officials have been considering a range of proposals aimed at encouraging people to have more children.
As The New York Times reported Monday, White House aides have met in recent weeks with policy experts and advocates for boosting U.S. birth rates, which have been declining since 2007.
Simone and Malcolm Collins, activists who founded Pronatalist.org, which they describe as "the first pronatalist organization in the world," told the Times that they have sent multiple draft executive orders to the White House, including one that would bestow a "National Medal of Motherhood" on women who have six children or more—a scheme with history in numerous fascist regimes, including those of Italian dictator Benito Mussolini, Nazi leader Adolf Hitler, and Soviet leader Joseph Stalin.
Other proposals aides have discussed would reserve 30% of Fulbright scholarships for people who are married or have children; grant a $5,000 "baby bonus" to families after they have a baby; and fund programs that educate women on their menstrual cycles so they can use "natural family planning" and determine when they are able to conceive.
"Just so we're clear: Instead of teaching kids about birth control and sexual health, the government would fund programs that teach little girls how to get pregnant," wrote Jessica Valenti at the Substack newsletter Abortion, Every Day.
The latter proposal would likely be offered without offering women any information about contraception or other comprehensive sex education, which President Donald Trump vehemently opposed in his first term.
The administration's "pronatalist" push has been steadily building since before Trump won the presidency. During the campaign last year, Vice President JD Vance provoked an uproar when he doubled down on his comments from 2021 when he had said the Democratic Party was run by "childless cat ladies." He said last summer that people without biological children "don't really have a direct stake in" the future and defended his previous remarks that the government should "punish the things that we think are bad"—meaning not having children.
"For years, proposals and debates have separated having children from raising children. But parents aren't dumb. They'll look around and ask whether this is a world where it's good to have children."
Vance's claim that the Democratic Party is "anti-family and anti-child" was based largely on his belief that politicians on the left are too negative about the future—frequently expressing concern about the scientific consensus that continuing to extract fossil fuels, which Trump has promised to ramp up, will cause more frequent and devastating extreme climate events.
Since Trump took office, he has pledged to be a "fertilization president"—touting his support for in vitro fertilization even as federal researchers in reproductive technology were dismissed from their jobs—and his transportation secretary, Sean Duffy, told staffers to prioritize infrastructure projects in areas with high birth and marriage rates.
But the Republican Party, including Trump, has long scoffed at concrete policy proposals meant to make raising children—not just birthing them—more accessible for American families.
The Michigan Republican Party penned a memo in 2023 saying a paid family leave proposal was a "ridiculous idea" akin to "summer break for adults," and a budget proposal by Trump in 2018 claimed to require states to provide paid parental leave, but it was derided as "phony and truly dangerous" by one policy expert.
Senate Republicans last year blocked legislation that would have helped lift 500,000 children out of poverty by expanding eligibility for the child tax credit.
According to a leaked draft for the Health and Human Services Department's budget, Trump is now proposing eliminating federal funding for Head Start, which provides early childhood education and other support services for low-income children and their families, helping nearly 40 million children since it began six decades ago.
Bruce Lesley, president of First Focus on Children, said of the proposed cuts to Head Start last week that it was "shocking to see an administration consider a proposal that will impose such widespread harm on children."
"Rarely has there been such a clear, targeted attack on children," said Lesley. "Parents already have trouble finding available childcare and early learning programs, and even when they do, they struggle to afford them. The average annual cost of center-based childcare for an infant is over $15,000, more than in-state college tuition in many states. And who has the least access and greatest financial challenges to care? The children served by Head Start.
Meanwhile, the federal budget proposal passed by House Republicans earlier this month would help pay for "huge tax giveaways for wealthy households and businesses," said the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, by cutting health coverage for 72 million people who rely on Medicaid and food assistance for an estimated 13.8 million children who receive Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits.
Responding to the reports of Trump's potential "pronatalist" proposals, Ellen Galinsky, president of the Families and Work Institute, told the Institute for Public Accuracy that the White House "can't just encourage people to have children. You have to think about what happens to those children after they're born."
"The countries that have been more successful in [raising children] have given family allowances, parental leave, and focused on who will teach and take care of children," said Galinsky. "The more children you have, the more likely it is you'll need to work and bring in a salary. Do parents have flexibility at their workplace?"
"For years, proposals and debates have separated having children from raising children," she added. "But parents aren't dumb. They'll look around and ask whether this is a world where it's good to have children."
Republicans' proposed cuts to essential services for families demonstrate that they "don't care about making the world better, safer, or healthier for American families and children," wrote Valenti. "They just want women to have more babies."
"What happens after that?" she added. "They couldn't care less."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump Gutting of GSA Office Puts Dozens of Federal Childcare Centers at Risk
"It's an assault on people with small children being able to work," said one childcare facility board member.
Mar 31, 2025
The recent mass firing of employees at a federal childcare office and the elimination of its work accrediting dozens of facilities on federal property may ultimately further U.S. President Donald Trump and his billionaire ally, Elon Musk's, goal of shrinking the government—with many public servants likely to be pushed out of their jobs due to a lack of childcare.
In a move that was not previously reported to the public, the General Services Administration (GSA)—which handles real estate and leasing for the federal government—fired nearly everyone on the 18-person staff of the agency's childcare office on March 7, soon after their supervisor advised them to take the "deferred resignation" offered by the Office of Personnel Management under the direction of Musk's advisory body, the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).
As The Washington Postreported Monday, the only remaining employee of the office, Jennifer Fee, told childcare centers run by the GSA on March 18 that the office would no longer be paying for accreditation or renewal for centers or requiring the facilities to be accredited by the National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC), which has "long set the national standard for high-quality early learning programs."
The NAEYC told the Post the change is likely to result in "decreased quality and access."
"We're going to have less accreditation, less standards to follow, potentially lower quality, and higher tuition costs."
Ultimately, one member of the board of directors of a GSA childcare center told the Post, "it's an assault on people with small children being able to work."
"We're going to have less accreditation, less standards to follow, potentially lower quality, and higher tuition costs," said the member.
The GSA has overseen 82 childcare centers in federal buildings across the country for years, with the centers required to ensure that at least half the children they serve are the dependents of federal employees.
The centers have for years been able to provide care while charging families considerably less money than the average private childcare facility because the GSA covers facility costs and accreditation fees, with the childcare center board member telling the Post her center was able to charge $2,000 per month for tuition—less than many accredited centers in the Washington, D.C. area.
At least 12 of the GSA's childcare centers are located in places identified by the Center for American Progress as "childcare deserts," where there are more children in need of childcare than there are spots at licensed centers.
Half of the centers—41—are in government buildings that were included on a list of federal properties that DOGE targeted for ending their leases, and eight have been named as ones that could be eliminated more quickly through "accelerated disposition," according to new list posted by the GSA last week.
"This harms children, families, and childcare providers who care for them," said the Empire State Campaign for Child Care.
Chris Adams, a software developer, said it was "characteristically cruel" of the Trump administration to likely force both public and private sector workers "to quit by going after their childcare."
Longtime early childhood educator and advocate Cindy Jurie said the gutting of the childcare office suggests "tax breaks for the wealthy supersede all else."
While demanding cuts to government investments in foreign aid, health research, Social Security, healthcare, and education, Trump and the Republican Party have pushed for a permanent extension to 2017 tax cuts that primarily benefited corporations and the richest Americans.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Why Every American Worker Deserves Paid Family Leave
I’m sad that we lost my brother Dave, but I’m also angry that when tragedy hits, our policies make life harder for families. I’m angry that for most of us, going back to work is a necessity, not a choice.
Oct 13, 2024
Millions of working American families are facing a crisis: how to care for loved ones.
We all need to give or get care at some point in our lives, but all too often this can be incredibly burdensome or even impossible. Too many Americans simply cannot afford their own care or are unable to take time off work for the birth of a child, a loved one falling ill, or an aging parent.
Most of us have no access to any sort of paid leave, and few employers provide leave to employees. This leaves more than 1 in 5 Americans, or 53 million people, working as unpaid family caregivers and providing more than $600 billion in unpaid care annually.
My family is among the millions who struggle with this every day.
A few months ago, my life changed in an instant. My brother Dave, his wife Katie, and their child Mikey were involved in a terrible car accident. We lost my brother that night, and Katie was severely injured, but thankfully Mikey survived unscathed.
This isn’t just about my family. This is about all of our families. It’s about the kind of country we want to live in. A country where reality is acknowledged, care is valued, families are supported, and where no one faces tragedy alone.
And as if that weren’t enough, we discovered that Katie was pregnant. She’d planned to surprise our family with the news the next week. Instead, we were left grieving the loss of a husband, a father, and a brother, while trying to support a family that was suddenly in crisis.
Our family came together as best we could. Katie and Mikey needed care, and we all needed time to process our grief. But time wasn’t something we had the luxury of affording.
Why? Because work beckoned.
Like many Americans, most of my family doesn’t have paid leave in the event of an emergency. In fact, I’m the only one in my family with access to a paid leave program. My mother-in-law had to take unpaid leave under the federal Family and Medical Leave Act to care for Katie.
Imagine going weeks, even months, without a paycheck while trying to care for your family. Most people can’t afford that.
The rest of my family — farmers, preschool teachers, nursing assistants, small business owners — also don’t have paid leave. These are the same people we applauded and called “essential” during the pandemic. But we don’t treat them as essential when it comes to supporting them through life’s hardest moments. Where is their paid leave?
I’m sad that we lost Dave, but I’m also angry that when tragedy hits, our policies make life harder for families. I’m angry that for most of us, going back to work is a necessity, not a choice.
This is a policy failure. There is no federal rule that provides paid family leave or sick days for all workers. Only a small minority of workers receive dedicated paid family leave through their jobs. Most aren’t so fortunate. Millions of workers don’t even have a single paid sick day.
That’s why we need paid family leave for all.
Imagine a world where every family has the time to care for each other in moments of crisis. Where a parent doesn’t have to choose between being there for their child and keeping a roof over their head. Where we treat each other with the dignity and respect we all deserve.
This isn’t just about my family. This is about all of our families. It’s about the kind of country we want to live in. A country where reality is acknowledged, care is valued, families are supported, and where no one faces tragedy alone. No wonder paid leave has massive support from voters across party lines.
It’s time we ask every politician running for office if they support paid family leave. And if they don’t, we need to hold them accountable.
And then in 2025, let’s pass paid leave for all. For Dave. For Katie. For Mikey. And for every family like mine that’s faced a moment of crisis.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular