logo
It's not just more babies, Republicans are pushing idea one parent should ditch work and stay at home with the kids

It's not just more babies, Republicans are pushing idea one parent should ditch work and stay at home with the kids

Independent12-05-2025
That's because they want a stronger family unit, which they argue comes from one parent staying home.
White House staffers have discussed several options for encouraging parents to stay home with their children, three people who have been part of the discussions told The New York Times.
Ideas being discussed include giving families more money for each child they have, removing federal tax credits for day care, and opening up federal lands for home construction. Advocates argue that if families can spend less on housing, more of them will be able to live on a single income.
For instance, Indiana Republican Senator Jim Banks recently introduced a bill that would, in effect, pay stay-at-home parents. Republicans have also suggested that the child tax credit be expanded partly by removing tax breaks intended for working parents to pay for day care.
Missouri Republican Senator Josh Hawley has suggested expanding the child tax credit to $5,000 per child in the hope that the additional money would allow parents to work less. During last year's presidential campaign, Vice President JD Vance also supported a $5,000 child tax credit. While the measure has bipartisan support, most Democrats also back subsidies for day care.
Even as the White House pushes a conservative social agenda promoting traditional marriage and gender roles, studies are unclear whether a child does better at a day care or at home with a parent.
This comes as many American families need two incomes to survive. Nearly 65 percent of mothers in two-parent households with at least one child under the age of 18 work outside the home, a figure which has increased significantly over the course of the past half-century. Similarly, child care costs have also increased, with an average cost of $11,000 per child per year as of 2023. Families in many larger cities pay more than double that.
Conservatives argue that they're not pushing mothers to leave the workforce, simply giving them a choice to work less if they want to do so. They note that a Gallup poll in March found that 60 percent of American women say that they would prefer to work part-time or stay at home. Thirty-seven percent of men said the same.
'President Trump believes parents know how to best raise their children, and this administration is pursuing policies that empower parents with the flexibility to make the best choices for their kids while lowering child care costs,' White House spokesperson Taylor Rogers told The Times.
Conservatives generally don't say which parent could decide to remain at home. However, more than 80 percent of stay-at-home parents are women.
Hawley told The Times that the effort is 'not just about increasing the total number of children.'
'It is increasing the number of families, mothers, and fathers, and the ability of the family to spend time together,' he added.
Banks told the paper that Democrats have been 'blocking the child care options many families prefer, like using a church-run day care center or having a parent or grandparent care for their children.'
Democrats often slam Republicans for their resistance to policies that make it easier for mothers to work.
'You want to help families? How about paid family and medical leave?' Connecticut Democratic Rep. Rosa DeLauro told The Times.
Parents say that the suggested legislation with the largest child tax credits isn't enough for one parent to stay home.
Katie Holler, 27, from Ohio, has two young children.
'It's not based in the experience of families who have to work,' she said. 'It's pennies when you need dollars.'
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

College endowment tax is leading to hiring freezes and could mean cuts in financial aid
College endowment tax is leading to hiring freezes and could mean cuts in financial aid

The Independent

time24 minutes ago

  • The Independent

College endowment tax is leading to hiring freezes and could mean cuts in financial aid

A big increase in the tax on university endowments is adding to financial uncertainty for the wealthiest colleges in the U.S., leading several already to lay off staff or implement hiring freezes. Spending more endowment money on taxes could also lead colleges to reduce financial aid, cutting off access to elite institutions for lower-income students, colleges and industry experts have warned. President Donald Trump signed the tax increase into law last month as part of his signature spending bill. The new tax rates take effect in 2026, but colleges such as Harvard, Yale and Stanford already are citing the tax as one of many reasons for making cuts across their universities. Each will be on the hook to pay hundreds of millions more in taxes, while also navigating reductions in research grants and other threats to funding by the Trump administration. A tax on college endowments was introduced during Trump's first administration, collecting 1.4% of wealthy universities' investment earnings. The law signed by Trump last month creates a new tiered system that taxes the richest schools at the highest rates. The new tax will charge an 8% rate at schools with $2 million or more in assets for each enrolled student. Schools with $750,000 to $2 million will be charged 4%, and schools with $500,000 to $750,000 will continue to be charged the 1.4% rate. The tax applies only to private colleges and universities with at least 3,000 students, up from the previous cutoff of 500 students. 'The tax now will really solely apply to private research universities,' said Steven Bloom, assistant vice president of government relations for the American Council on Education. 'It's going to mean that these schools are going to have to spend more money under the tax, taking it away from what they primarily use their endowment assets for — financial aid.' This small group of wealthy colleges faces a tax increase The law will increase the endowment tax for about a dozen universities, according to an Associated Press analysis of data from the National Association of College and University Business Officers. Harvard, Yale, Stanford, Princeton and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology are expected to pay the 8% rate next year. The schools facing the 4% rate include Notre Dame, Dartmouth College, Rice University, University of Pennsylvania, Washington University in St. Louis and Vanderbilt University. Some universities are on the edge of the law's parameters. Both Duke and Emory, for instance, were shy of the $750,000-per-student endowment threshold based on last fiscal year. Endowments are made up of donations to the college, which are invested to maintain the money over time. Colleges often spend about 5% of their investment earnings every year to put toward their budgets. Much of it goes toward scholarships for students, along with costs such as research or endowed faculty positions. Despite the colleges' wealth, the tax will drastically impact their budgets, said Phillip Levine, an economist and professor at Wellesley College. 'They're looking for savings wherever possible,' Levine said, which could impact financial aid. ' One of the most important things they do with their endowment is lower the cost of education for lower- and middle-income students. The institutions paying the highest tax are also the ones charging these students the least amount of money to attend.' For example, at Rice University in Houston, officials anticipate the college will need to pay $6.4 million more in taxes. That equates to more than 100 student financial aid packages, the university said, but Rice officials will explore all other options to avoid cutting that support. How colleges are adjusting to financial pressures In the meantime, some universities are going forward with staff cuts. Yale University says it will have to pay an estimated $280 million in total endowment taxes, citing the tax in a campus message implementing a hiring freeze. Stanford University announced plans to reduce its operating budget by $140 million this upcoming school year, which included 363 layoffs and an ongoing hiring freeze. The university spent months trying to determine where to reduce its budget, but said it would continue to support undergraduate financial aid and funding for Ph.D. students. Research universities are under increasing financial pressure from reductions in funding from the National Institutes of Health, the National Science Foundation and other federal agencies. No university knows this pressure better than Harvard, the country's wealthiest college. Its $53 billion endowment puts it at the top of the list for the new tax, but it's also seeing massive portions of research funding under threat in its ongoing battle with the White House. The federal government has frozen $2.6 billion in Harvard's research grants in connection with civil rights investigations focused on antisemitism and Harvard's efforts to promote diversity on campus. But the impact of other administration policies on the university could approach $1 billion annually, Harvard said in a statement. 'It's not like Harvard is going to go from one of the best institutions in the world to just a mediocre institution. That's probably not going to happen," Levine said. 'But that doesn't mean it's not going to be a bad thing — that there won't be pain and that students won't suffer.' ___ Mumphrey reported from Phoenix. Associated Press writer Sharon Lurye in Philadelphia contributed to this report. ___ The Associated Press' education coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP's standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at

Trump's attempts to distance himself from the Epstein files are failing
Trump's attempts to distance himself from the Epstein files are failing

The Guardian

time24 minutes ago

  • The Guardian

Trump's attempts to distance himself from the Epstein files are failing

One of Trump's preternatural abilities is his apparent animal instinct to lie on the spot whenever he senses he might be cornered. His initial Pavlovian training by his mob lawyer Roy Cohn and subsequent experience in more than 4,000 lawsuits and countless scandals seem to have ingrained in him that lying, the more outrageous the better, buys him time, plays to his credulous followers as insouciant defiance, and wears down his accusers. When Trump's distractions failed to distract from the Jeffrey Epstein files, he offered a story without missing a beat to distance himself from any taint. In his tale, he was traduced by Epstein. Trump was taken advantage of, violated, despoiled. There could be no guilt by association; Trump was a victim, too. Perhaps, after claiming to no effect that Barack Obama, Joe Biden and the former FBI director James Comey had fabricated the files, he felt that he had at last found ground where he could gain some traction. Trump always designates a scapegoat, but neither Tren de Agua nor Hunter Biden would fit with Epstein. All along, Trump has missed the easiest and most obvious scapegoat. Why not blame Epstein for Epstein? Trump just needed to invent a story. He began by blurting on 28 July: 'But for years, I wouldn't talk to Jeffrey Epstein. I wouldn't talk because he did something that was inappropriate. He hired help, and I said, 'Don't ever do that again.' He stole people that worked for me. I said, 'Don't ever do that again.' He did it again. And I threw him out of the place – persona non grata. I threw him out, and that was it. I'm glad I did, if you want to know the truth.' After establishing the premise of his story, he added more detail the next day. 'People that work in the spa – I have a great spa, one of the best spas in the world at Mar-a-Lago – and people were taken out of the spa, hired by him. In other words, gone. And other people would come and complain, 'This guy is taking people from the spa.' I didn't know that. He took people that worked for me. And I told him, 'Don't do it any more.' And he did it. I said, 'Stay the hell out of here.'' A reporter followed up to ask if any of those employees were young women, an opportunity for further Trump story enhancement. 'The answer is yes, they were in the spa,' Trump said. 'I told him, I said, 'Listen, we don't want you taking our people, whether it was spa or not spa' … And he was fine. And then not too long after that, he did it again.' Then Trump was asked if one of those young women was Virginia Giuffre, who was exploited by Epstein beginning at age 16 in 2000 until she escaped his clutches in 2002, eventually filing lawsuits against him that helped break the case open. 'I think she worked at the spa,' Trump replied. 'I think that was one of the people, yeah. He stole her.' He added, 'And by the way, she had no complaints about us, as you know – none whatsoever.' Trump's self-defensive remarks were an accumulation of lies and distortions, each one at risk of tumbling on the next. Unfortunately, it was contradicted by the factual timeline. And his comments about Giuffre, the tragically abused child who bore witness, for whom he offered not a word of sympathy, depicting her as stolen property, offended the Giuffre family, who came forward to denounce his heartlessness. 'It was shocking to hear President Trump invoke our sister and say that he was aware that Virginia had been 'stolen' from Mar-a-Lago,' read the family's statement. This was not the public relations success that Trump had hoped for to lay the Epstein scandal to rest. Trump suggested in his story that Giuffre was only one of the 'people' Epstein had poached from him. In his telling, he first warned Epstein before he 'stole' Giuffre. In fact, it was Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein's former girlfriend and accomplice, who recruited Giuffre and participated in her sexual abuse. There is no record of others than Giuffre recruited from the Mar-a-Lago spa. Trump's story of multiple 'people' and his warning to Epstein are baseless. Still, the ever reliable White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt stated: 'The fact remains that President Trump kicked Jeffrey Epstein out of his club for being a creep to his female employees.' Trump went on Newsmax to praise her, the press secretary, as if she were the winner of a modeling contest: 'She's become a star. It's that face, it's that brain, it's those lips, the way they move, they move like she's a machine gun.' It was true Trump had not spoken 'for years' to Epstein. But there his truthfulness ended. Three years after Trump claimed he had cut his ties to Epstein for stealing Giuffre, in 2003, Trump sent him a risqué poem celebrating his 50th birthday inside his drawing of a naked woman, signing his name to represent pubic hair, according to the Wall Street Journal. 'We have certain things in common, Jeffrey … A pal is a wonderful thing … and may every day be a wonderful secret.' According to the Washington Post, their relationship ruptured not in 2000 as Trump claimed, but in 2004 over a real estate rivalry to purchase a Palm Beach estate. Trump, whose casinos went bankrupt that year, somehow found the cash to outbid Epstein. Four years later, Trump sold the estate to a Russian oligarch closely tied to Vladimir Putin for double the price, at $95m. 'Don't say Russian,' Trump told a reporter from the Palm Beach Post. He urged the reporter just to write 'foreign'. Trump and Epstein socialized together for years with 'young women', some underage, and often with models, including a party for 'calendar girls' at Mar-a-Lago in 1992, where the two were the only other guests, and Trump's alleged groping of the model Stacey Williams in Trump Tower with Epstein present in 1993. Trump denies these allegations. 'Epstein enjoyed hanging out backstage at beauty pageants and fashion shows with his Palm Beach and New York neighbor and friend Donald Trump, former models said,' the Miami Herald reported. Trump himself owned three beauty pageants. He described going backstage on the Howard Stern radio talk show in 2005: 'You know they're standing there with no clothes … And you see these incredible looking women. And so I sort of get away with things like that.' Trump created Trump Model Management, also known as T Models, in 1999. T Models recruited girls as young as 14 to the US on tourist visas with lavish promises of fame and fortune, and once they arrived paid them minimally. 'It is like modern-day slavery,' said one of the models, Rachel Blais. 'Honestly, they are the most crooked agency I've ever worked for, and I've worked for quite a few.' Epstein wanted a modeling agency of his own. He admired Trump's T Models and sought to replicate it. He invested in one based in Paris operated by Jean-Luc Brunel, a model agency head who was also accused of sex trafficking. Courtney Powell Soerensen, a model, told the Miami Herald: 'Epstein had to have his slimy peons and Brunel was the ideal person to do the job.' Brunel had been the subject of a 60 Minutes exposé as an alleged sexual abuser of models in 1988. In New York, in the 1990s, Brunel lived in Trump Tower. 'The modeling agency was the perfect vehicle for Epstein to get more victims,' Giuffre said. Heather Braden, a model, told the Miami Herald she saw Brunel, Epstein and Trump at parties together frequently in the early 1990s. Brunel was charged with rape in 2021 and died by apparent suicide in a French prison in 2022, about two years after Epstein's apparent suicide. Trump had never before told his self-exonerating story about how he had broken with Epstein over Giuffre. But he had spoken publicly about his relationship with Epstein in 2002, when he rejoiced in their friendship to New York magazine: 'Terrific guy. He's a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side. No doubt about it – Jeffrey enjoys his social life.' Little remarked upon in the citation of this quote was that Trump's response to the writer appears intended to offer a more positive and vivid picture of Epstein, at least in Trump's eyes, than the reclusive and serious image Epstein was trying to promote. Trump's description was preceded in the article by this set-up: 'Epstein likes to tell people that he's a loner, a man who's never touched alcohol or drugs, and one whose nightlife is far from energetic. And yet if you talk to Donald Trump, a different Epstein emerges.' Trump, always seeking to elevate himself, preened in talking about Epstein as following his example as a Casanova. Now he continues to stonewall the public over the Epstein files. Days after Maxwell was interviewed by the deputy attorney general Todd Blanche in her Florida prison, she was granted transfer to a minimal security penitentiary in Texas. Her move heightens the intrigue surrounding her deposition, which the administration is keeping secret despite calls by Democratic senators for its release. By invoking Giuffre, Trump has activated her family. They were enraged by the favor suddenly granted to Maxwell and wonder whether it is part of a deal. 'President Trump has sent a clear message today: pedophiles deserve preferential treatment and their victims do not matter,' read their statement. 'This move smacks of a cover-up. The victims deserve better.' Trump's ill-conceived story about Giuffre has undermined rather than bolstered him in maintaining control of the storyline. Sidney Blumenthal is a Guardian US columnist

Futures edge up as Fed shake-up stokes dovish bets
Futures edge up as Fed shake-up stokes dovish bets

Reuters

time24 minutes ago

  • Reuters

Futures edge up as Fed shake-up stokes dovish bets

Aug 8 (Reuters) - U.S. stock index futures rose on Friday after President Donald Trump's temporary pick for a Federal Reserve governor fueled expectations of a more dovish central bank board. Trump said on Thursday he would nominate Council of Economic Advisers Chairman Stephen Miran as Fed Governor Adriana Kugler's interim replacement, following Kugler's surprise resignation last week. U.S. stocks lost steam on Thursday after Bloomberg News reported that Fed Governor Christopher Waller is emerging as a top candidate to be the central bank's next chair. Trump has repeatedly criticized Fed Chair Jerome Powell for not cutting interest rates and has accelerated the search for a replacement after several retracted threats to oust Powell before his term ends on May 15. The White House's push to overhaul the central bank's leadership has fueled worries about its independence. At the same time, investors believe revising Fed leadership could favor looser monetary policy that aligns with Trump's agenda. According to the CME Group's FedWatch tool, traders broadly expect the Fed's first rate cut of the year next month and see at least two reductions by year-end. At 5:31 a.m. ET, S&P 500 E-minis were up 16 points, or 0.25%, Nasdaq 100 E-minis were up 72.25 points, or 0.31% and Dow E-minis were up 61 points, or 0.14%. The Nasdaq (.IXIC), opens new tab eked out a record closing high on Thursday after signs that major technology firms could avoid Trump's new tariffs on chip imports by manufacturing in the United States. But the S&P 500 (.SPX), opens new tab and the Dow (.DJI), opens new tab ended lower, weighed down by a 14.1% drop in Eli Lilly (LLY.N), opens new tab after results from a late-stage study on its experimental GLP-1 pill fell behind that of Novo Nordisk's ( opens new tab. Meanwhile, U.S. tariffs on a bunch of trading partners took effect at midnight on Thursday. Tokyo's trade negotiator said Washington will amend a presidential executive order to remove overlapping tariffs on Japanese goods, terming it as oversight. In earnings-related moves, Trade Desk (TTD.O), opens new tab sank 29% in premarket trading after the ad-tech firm reported a sharp slowdown in second-quarter revenue growth. Pinterest (PINS.N), opens new tab tumbled 12.5% as the social media platform missed analysts' estimates for second-quarter profit. Microchip Technology (MCHP.O), opens new tab lost 7.9% after the chipmaker's first-quarter results failed to impress investors. St. Louis Fed President Alberto Musalem is scheduled to speak later at 10:20 a.m. ET.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store