In pursuit of good child care

National Review, April 16, 1990 by Susan Mandel

WHEN LAST we turned our attention to Congress and "the family," it looked as though the liberal ABC (Act for Better Child Care) proposal was certain to pass and create a huge federal nanny to help raise American children. It did pass the Senate overwhelmingly, but House Democrats have refused even to consider that version. The reason: a revolt in the Democratic Party.

Not only did liberal Representatives Tom Downey (D., N.Y.) and George Miller (D., Calif) adopt conservative rhetoric in opposing the ABC bill, they also made President Bush's child-care proposal the basis of their own measure. The result of the intra-party struggle is a new House Democratic child-care bill that comes much closer to the conservative bi-partisan proposal than it does to the original ABC.

If this sounds too good to be true, that's because it is. As NR goes to press the new House version carries over much of what was objectionable from before: federal mandates on everything from hand washing to worker-child ratios; day care in the public schools; and no guarantee of parental choice in the state-grant section. All this would be enough to make Bush veto the bill even though it centers on his own idea of providing tax relief to low-income families with pre-schoolers.

What's significant here, however, is that conservatives managed to shift the child-care debate far enough to the right that Democrats had to revamp their thinking on the issue. "The debate had been how much money should we give for child-care centers and how tough would the federal standards be," says Representative Steve Bartlett (R., Tex.). "Now the debate is how should the Federal Government help low-income families with children. All the current child-care bills have as their basis tax credits for low income families."

Because of their internal divisions, Democrats have had furious battles on this issue. The Education & Labor Committee and Ways & Means Committee were locked over which approach to take. Even more contentious was the question of which committee would oversee the program. Child-care activists wanted jurisdiction in Education & Labor, where they have a lot of influence and could, no doubt, get the program expanded. Negotiations between the two sides broke down in November, ending with an unusually vicious memo sent to reporters by Marion Wright Edelman (whose Children's Defense Fund wrote the ABC bill) in which she denounced long-time allies Downey and Miller.

Mrs. Edelman followed up her memo the next day by having CDF staffers take 325 pre-schoolers to Capitol Hill to lobby members. One group went to Downey's office, hoping to show him up. But the congressman outfoxed them. After listening to their song about passing ABC legislation, Downey got up and led the children in a rendition of "The Itsy Bitsy Spider." Mrs. Edelman has since retreated to a low-profile approach.

Such were the passions of the debate that Downey and the main sponsor of the original bill, House Education & Labor Chairman Gus Hawkins (D., Calif.), resumed speaking to each other just this March-and only on orders from House Speaker Tom Foley. Foley ordered the shotgun wedding when a coalition of Republicans and conservative Democrats introduced their own child-care proposal, which quickly overtook ABC in popularity. Hawkins subsequently agreed to give up ABC and accept the Downey proposal. HE WAR is far from over. At press time the Democrats are still fi tin over vouchers and funding for religious day care. In order to get ABC passed last year, Majority Whip Richard Gephardt promised he would work to get language into the bill to allow states to fund church-run day care, which is strongly opposed by Hawkins, Downey, and Miller, as well as the National Education Association. The NEA fears that the application of vouchers to day care might set a precedent for tuition tax credits for the schools. Speaker Foley, who wanted the provisions for vouchers and religious day care, was seen on the House floor on March 20 with Downey and Miller. The Speaker's face turned bright red as he shook his finger in their faces.

The Democrats are under pressure to bring their bill to the floor to stop the momentum behind the conservative alternative. But both Representatives Downey and Miller are simultaneously negotiating with Republicans on a consensus bill closely resembling that alternative.

Ironically, the mastermind behind the Republican strategy is a Democrat, Representative Charles Stenholm (D., Tex.), head of the Conservative Democratic Forum and chief sponsor, with Representative Clay Shaw (R., Fla.), of the conservative bi-partisan measure. Stenholm built a coalition around his proposal, which sticks to conservative principles but doesn't cut costs too drastically. As the House heads for a showdown the StenholmShaw team has boxed its opponents into a corner: To avoid losing to the conservative alternative, they must come close to adopting it.