
Zohran Mamdani's campaign proposes free childcare. Is it finally a winning policy?
Now, her care duties are split between Stockdale's parents, who relocated from Wisconsin to help out, and her husband, who cut his hours down to part time and arranged with his employer to let him bring their 10-month-old to work several days a week.
'You feel fragile,' said Stockdale, lamenting that so many families have to choose between financial stability and their child's wellbeing.
So when Zohran Mamdani campaigned on a platform of affordability, proposing free childcare for children aged six weeks and older, it made her feel that the pain she and other parents had experienced had not gone unnoticed.
Mamdani, the 33-year-old state assemblymember who won the Democratic primary for New York City mayor last month, has put forth a variety of kid- and family-focused ideas, including distributing baby baskets containing formula and postpartum supplies to new parents, building up mental health infrastructure in schools and closing off high-traffic streets adjacent to school zones. But what's garnered the most attention is his promise of free childcare, a system he plans to fund by raising taxes on corporations and the city's richest residents.
As he told supporters in his victory speech: 'We have won because New Yorkers have stood up for a city they can afford. A city where they can do more than just struggle … where childcare doesn't cost more than [college].'
For Stockdale, seeing these policies at the center of a major political campaign has underscored how childcare affordability is not only a core concern for voters – but also a winning issue.
'It's got so much support,' said Stockdale, also an organizer with the advocacy group New Yorkers United for Childcare. 'People have started to realize that this should be a key component of any candidate's platform.'
In many ways, Mamdani's platform responds to the surge of activism that New York has seen in favor of making childcare a public good – activism that first emerged at the height of the Covid-19 pandemic, when the importance and fragility of the country's childcare system was laid bare. Since then, elected officials have begun to take the issue seriously, explained Allison Lew, senior organizer with New Yorkers United for Child Care.
A report released from the New York City comptroller's office this year shows the average cost of center-based care across the five boroughs was $26,000 a year, and that to afford the cost of care for a two-year-old in New York City, a family would need to earn $334,000 annually. 'People are draining their savings, going into debt, borrowing on their 401ks [retirement funds],' said Lew. 'You have to be wealthy in order for childcare to not be an issue.'
For many would-be parents, the inaccessibility is affecting their family-planning decisions, causing them to delay having kids or to only have one child, despite wanting more. 'We would love to have another, but financially, we don't know if we can afford it,' said Nancy Keith, who is raising a 15-month-old in the Bedford-Stuyvesant neighborhood in Brooklyn. Keith says that she and her husband waited until they were in their late 30s, and more settled in their career, to have a child. Even still, they need financial assistance from their parents to afford the $26,000 a year they pay for childcare.
Should Mamdani win the mayoral election in November and make his childcare vision a reality, these challenges could become things of the past, experts say.
Most immediately, parents and childcare workers alike would experience improved financial security. Families would see thousands more dollars in their bank accounts every month, while childcare workers would be paid salaries and receive benefits at parity with New York public school employees.
Gregory Brender, chief policy and innovation officer at the Day Care Council of New York, explains that pay parity has been a priority for the provider network for decades, making it a relief to finally see it be a legislative priority. 'Early childhood education depends on a talented and educated workforce, and they need to be compensated appropriately,' he said.
These family-focused policies would also improve equity in the city, as more parents – especially women – would be able to remain in the workforce. And in making the city more affordable for everyone, families from diverse backgrounds with a range of incomes would be able to remain in their communities.
Down the line, such policies would also bolster the city's economy. Collectively, New Yorkers spend as much as $15bn on childcare every year. And in 2022, families not being able to afford childcare cost the city $23bn between lost tax revenues and workplace departures as parents were forced to drop out of the workforce.
'We just cannot afford to not have universal childcare,' Lew said.
Universal childcare isn't cheap. But the city has the money, said Justin Brannan, a New York City councilmember representing parts of Brooklyn and chair of the city's committee on finance. 'We have been stuck in this cycle of false austerity where we are supposed to believe that we have to choose between little and even less, and it's just not true,' Brannan said, noting that the city's budget totals almost $116bn (universal childcare would cost $12bn per year). 'We just need to do a better job of spending our money,' he said.
Implementing such a system may not be as simple as carving out room in the budget, however. Some facets of the plan – like raising taxes – need to be approved by the state legislature and the governor. Kathy Hochul, the New York governor, has already said she will not raise income taxes. Mamdani has acknowledged these challenges, saying in an interview with Morning Edition, 'Any mayor that has an ambition that meets the scale of the crisis of the people that they're seeking to represent will have to work with [the state].'
Still, the ideas have momentum.
New York has been a pioneer in accessible childcare infrastructure for several years, including universal preschool for three- and four-year-olds (known as pre-K and 3-K). And although many doubted Bill de Blasio's ability to pull off his promise of universal preschool when he ran for mayor more than a decade ago, the program is now a national model. Before that, the city instituted a voucher program that enabled low-income families to access childcare for children aged six weeks to 15 years – although seats are limited. As a result of those developments, advocates like Lew say some degree of publicly funded childcare is now a 'non-negotiable' for many New Yorkers.
Mamdani says his campaign promises to build on those past successes. 'These platform planks are rooted in very recent New York City history,' he said in an interview with the Nation. 'Universal childcare is something that many candidates are in support of because of the success of universal pre-K.'
New York isn't alone in its quest for solutions to the nationwide childcare crisis. In 2022, New Mexico made childcare free for most families. That same year, Washington DC raised childcare workers' wages through a tax on the district's wealthiest residents. And in 2023, Vermont guaranteed financial support for childcare for all families with incomes below 575% of the federal poverty level – amounting to 90% of families in the state.
Hailey Gibbs, associate director of early childhood policy at the Center for American Progress, said it's an issue that crosses the political aisle. 'Folks, regardless of what state they represent or how far they sit in the political extremes, understand that the lack is meaningful,' she said.
'It's a unifying issue,' echoed Karen Schulman, senior director of state childcare policy at the National Women's Law Center, pointing out that even staunchly Republican states like Alabama, Georgia and Montana have created early childhood education funds.
But Mamdani's campaign is the first in the country to put children and childcare front and center – and win, at least at the primary level. 'That's pretty bold for the US,' Gibbs said.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


BreakingNews.ie
13 minutes ago
- BreakingNews.ie
Putin and Zelenskiy to meet, Donald Trump says following European leaders summit
Presidents Vladimir Putin and Volodymyr Zelenskiy will meet, Donald Trump has said following a White House summit with European leaders aimed at bringing an end to the war in Ukraine. The US president spoke directly with the Russian president to begin planning a meeting between the two warring leaders, which will then be followed by a three-way meeting involving himself. Advertisement It comes after Mr Trump said Moscow will 'accept' multinational efforts to guarantee Ukraine's security while hosting several European leaders including the Ukrainian President, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, French President Emmanuel Macron and Nato secretary general Mark Rutte. Posting on his Truth Social platform after the meeting, Mr Trump said he and the eight leaders discussed security guarantees before he called the Russian president. He described the meeting as 'very good' and said: 'During the meeting we discussed security guarantees for Ukraine, which guarantees would be provided by the various European countries, with a coordination with the United States of America. 'Everyone is happy about the possibility of PEACE for Russia/Ukraine. Advertisement 'At the conclusion of the meetings, I called president Putin and began arrangements for a meeting, at a location to be determined, between president Putin and president Zelenskiy. 'After the meeting takes place, we will have a trilat which would be the two presidents plus myself.' Before the White House talks, the US president said he would 'probably' be able to find common ground with the leaders on a plan to ward off future attacks on Ukraine. He previously met with Mr Putin in Anchorage, Alaska, on Friday, where he declared there was 'no deal until there's a deal' to end more than three years of fighting in eastern Europe. Advertisement 'The Alaska summit reinforced my belief that while difficult, peace is within reach and I believe, in a very significant step, President Putin agreed that Russia would accept security guarantees for Ukraine,' Mr Trump said on Monday. 'And this is one of the key points that we need to consider.' He later said: 'We also need to discuss the possible exchanges of territory taken into consideration the current line of contact.' Mr Trump's envoy, Steve Witkoff, had suggested measures similar to Nato's article five mutual defence provision – that an attack on one member is an attack on the entire bloc – could be offered by the US without Kyiv joining the alliance. Advertisement 'We were able to win the following concession: that the United States could offer article five-like protection, which is one of the real reasons why Ukraine wants to be in Nato,' Mr Witkoff told CNN over the weekend, as he spoke about the Alaska summit. Future three-way talks 'have a good chance' of stopping the conflict, the US president claimed. But the president appeared to share conflicting views on whether a ceasefire was necessary to stop the war. 'I don't think you need a ceasefire,' he had originally said, before later explaining that, 'all of us would obviously prefer an immediate ceasefire while we work on a lasting peace'. Advertisement Starmer welcomed plans for a security guarantee, after Mr Trump introduced him at the negotiating table as a 'friend'. The Prime Minister said: 'Your indication of security guarantees, of some sort of article five-style guarantees, fits with what we've been doing with the coalition of the willing which we started some months ago, bringing countries together and showing that we were prepared to step up to the plate when it came to security. United States President Donald J Trump leads European leaders, including Keir Starmer, in the Cross Hall of the White House (Aaron Schwartz/PA) 'With you coming alongside, the US alongside, what we've already developed, I think we could take a really important step forward today – a historic step, actually, could come out of this meeting in terms of security for Ukraine and security in Europe.' Mr Starmer also described potential future trilateral talks as appearing to be a 'sensible next step' and continued: 'So, thank you for being prepared to take that forward, because I think if we can ensure that that is the progress out of this meeting – both security guarantees and some sort of progress on (a) trilateral meeting of some sort to bring some of the difficult issues to a head – then I think today will be seen as a very important day in recent years.' The PA news agency understands the British Prime Minister disrupted his holiday plans over the weekend to join calls, including with Mr Trump and Mr Zelenskiy, before he headed to Washington, as reported in The Times. Mr Zelenskiy, whom Mr Trump greeted at the door of the West Wing with a handshake earlier in the evening, wore a black shirt with buttons and a black blazer to the meeting at the White House. His attire had appeared to become a point of irritation for Mr Trump during a previous meeting in February. Early in the meeting, the Ukrainian described the talks as 'really good', saying they had been 'the best' so far. Mr Zelenskiy said: 'We are very happy with the president that all the leaders are here and security in Ukraine depends on the United States and on you and on those leaders who are with us in our hearts.'


The Independent
43 minutes ago
- The Independent
JD Vance's silence during Trump-Zelensky meeting praised online: ‘See how much smoother things go'
U.S. vice president J.D. Vance was notably quiet during a summit with Ukrainian leader Volodymyr Zelensky on Monday — and social media users across the political spectrum are very happy about it. Numerous posts on X (formerly Twitter) and its more liberal rival Bluesky expressed relief or gratitude that Donald Trump's second in command had, in the words of one user, "kept his dumb mouth shut". It was a marked contrast to what happened when Zelensky last visited the White House in March, in which Vance berated the Ukrainian president for not saying 'thank you' more. "Things go a little better when J.V. [sic] keeps his trap shut and doesn't try to act tough," wrote one anti-Trump U.S. conservative on X. "I think they super-glued Vance's mouth shut. But overall that went better than I expected," said another, Trump-supporting user. Democratic influencer Majid Padellan agreed, saying: "What a difference it makes when Trump is hemmed in by the adults in the room and J.D. Vance is sitting at the kids' table instead of trying to ambush Zelensky." Others said they were happy that Vance had 'kept quiet', 'remained silent', 'kept his mouth shut', and refrained from making 'smart-ass 'look at me' comment[s]'. Users from outside the USA also chimed in. "Thank god that Vance wasn't allowed to say anything," said Estonian entrepreneur Alvar Laigna on X. "See how much smoother things go when J.D. Vance stays silent," said another user, seemingly from the UK. One Canadian commented that "Vance is being awfully quiet, like a good little boy", while a Swedish speaker on Bluesky declared: "Any time Vance stays silent is a win for humanity." Monday's meeting was relatively cordial, ending with both Trump and Zelensky expressing willingness to engage in trilateral peace talks with Russia. Trump even refused to rule out sending U.S. troops to the region in order to enforce any peace deal — something Russia has said it would oppose.


Sky News
an hour ago
- Sky News
Putin wasn't at the White House, but his influence was - the moments which reveal his hold over Trump
Vladimir Putin wasn't at the White House but his influence clearly was. At times, it dominated the room. There were three key moments that revealed the Russian president 's current hold over Donald Trump. The first was in the Oval Office. Sitting alongside Volodymyr Zelenskyy, the US president told reporters: "I don't think you need a ceasefire." It was a stunning illustration of Mr Trump's about-face in his approach to peace. For the past six months, a ceasefire has been his priority, but after meeting Mr Putin in Alaska, suddenly it's not. Confirmation that he now views the war through Moscow's eyes. The second was the format itself, with Mr Trump reverting to his favoured ask-what-you-like open-ended Q&A. In Alaska, Mr Putin wasn't made to take any questions - most likely, because he didn't want to. But here, Mr Zelenskyy didn't have a choice. He was subjected to a barrage of them to see if he'd learnt his lesson from last time. It was a further demonstration of the special status Mr Trump seems to afford to Mr Putin. The third was their phone call. Initially, President Trump said he'd speak to the Kremlin leader after his meeting with European leaders. But it turned out to be during it. A face-to-face meeting with seven leaders was interrupted for a phone call with one - as if Mr Trump had to check first with Mr Putin, before continuing his discussions. We still don't know the full details of the peace proposal that's being drawn up, but all this strongly suggests that it's one sketched out by Russia. The White House is providing the paper, but the Kremlin is holding the pen. 1:25 For Moscow, the aim now is to keep Mr Trump on their path to peace, which is settlement first, ceasefire later. It believes that's the best way of securing its goals, because it has more leverage so long as the fighting continues. But Mr Putin will be wary that Mr Trump is pliable and can easily change his mind, depending on the last person he spoke to. So to ensure that his sympathies aren't swayed, and its red lines remain intact, Russia will be straining to keep its voice heard. On Monday, for example, the Russian foreign ministry was quick to condemn recent comments from the UK government that it would be ready to send troops to help enforce any ceasefire. It described the idea as "provocative" and "predatory". Moscow is trying to drown out European concerns by portraying itself as the party that wants peace the most, and Kyiv (and Europe) as the obstacle. But while Mr Zelenskyy has agreed to a trilateral meeting, the Kremlin has not. After the phone call between Mr Putin and Mr Trump, it said the leaders discussed "raising the level of representatives" in the talks between Russia and Ukraine. No confirmation to what level.