As US childcare costs climb, states and other nations offer a road map

Families face rising prices everywhere, from the grocery store to the gas pump, while wages lag behind inflation. For parents trying to get a second income stream or preserve the only one they have, childcare is critical, and among the key issues they’re considering heading into November’s election.In 2024, households with children ages 13 and younger that paid for childcare spent an average of $10,520 annually, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. Daycare and preschool prices rose by 4% between August 2025 and 2026, outpacing the 3.4% increase in overall consumer prices, data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics shows. A July survey ranked affordability as the top economic concern that registered voters want congressional candidates to address.The Trump administration is considering a policy, championed by Vice President JD Vance, that would pay a parent to stay at home to care for a child, according to The New York Times. The idea has drawn criticism from progressives because it would use funds from a federal program intended to help working parents. And it has also divided Republicans, including some who believe the federal government should not subsidize childcare or pay people to leave the workforce. With rising costs straining childcare systems, experts suggest that looking to existing state and international models could give policymakers ideas about viable solutions.“There’s a lot more awareness about the importance of the early years” on child development, says Kimberly Morgan, a professor of political science and international affairs at George Washington University. “Arguments for some kind of interventions, I think, are probably stronger than they used to be.”Government’s roleIn the 1960s and early 1970s, policymakers considered creating a broader public childcare system that would have extended assistance beyond low-income families. But the idea faced opposition over the government’s role in childcare and whether public support would encourage more mothers to enter the workforce. Instead, the United States came to rely largely on a private childcare market, with public subsidies tied to the welfare system and helping low-income mothers work, Professor Morgan says. Jacquelyn Martin/APVice President JD Vance exits Air Force Two with his son Vivek, at Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International Airport, in Hebron, Kentucky, Oct. 21, 2026. Today, much of the federal government’s support for childcare is through the Child Care and Development Fund, which provides annual subsidies of about $9,000 per child. But the program only reaches a fraction of families who qualify. The national average cost of center-based childcare is about $15,000 to $17,800 per year.For the 2022 fiscal year, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services estimated that 11.8 million children were eligible for subsidies under federal rules and 9.1 million under more restrictive state rules. Only 1.8 million children – the vast majority living with a single parent – received them. Mr. Vance’s draft policy would expand CCDF eligibility to include couples where only one parent works, and the other stays home to care for children. It reflects what scholars say is the next wave in dealing with childcare costs. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services | Jacob Turcotte/Staff With more states struggling to meet demand for childcare subsidies, some experts note that the draft proposal would diverge from the program’s intended purpose of supporting working parents.“In recent years, more than a dozen states have implemented waitlists or frozen intakes for their subsidy programs because more eligible families want to participate than the state can serve,” says Gabrielle Pepin, a senior economist at the W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research. “So this proposed policy change would only put further strain on an already underfunded program without bringing in new resources.”Mr. Vance’s proposal has yet to be finalized or released, but paying couples to offset the cost of staying home with a child – rather than funding universal childcare – was part of the conservative Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025, which served as a policy blueprint for President Donald Trump’s second term.Universal childcareIn 2025, New Mexico became the first U.S. state to establish universal childcare by expanding existing subsidy programs funded by the Land Grant Permanent Fund, which collects royalties from the state’s oil and gas reserves. The new system allows all families, regardless of income, to apply for childcare assistance, though eligibility is still need-based.Erica Greenberg, a senior fellow in the Family and Financial Well-Being Division of the Urban Institute, and her team are researching the expanded system. In addition to commercial childcare tuition, many New Mexico parents apply for subsidies to cover at-home, neighborhood-based, or family-provided care.Dr. Greenberg says there are ways that governments can bridge the gap between supply and demand by funding multiple options for parents to choose from. “It’s really about a package of support that can raise a market that, without government funding, is very precarious and can’t survive on parent [funds] alone,” Dr. Greenberg explains.While it may be too early to evaluate the success of New Mexico’s model, Dr. Greenberg says other childcare pilot programs in Washington, D.C., and New York City are yielding useful data. Cedar Attanasio/AP/FileGov. Michelle Lujan Grisham announces an increase in childcare subsidies on July 1, 2021, in Santa Fe, New Mexico. “The national conversation has a lot to learn from the proof points that state and local governments have already started to establish,” Dr. Greenberg says.Beyond domestic models, lawmakers could also look to overseas childcare systems for ideas. Scandinavia offers examples, though experts note that many countries invest more in public childcare spending than the U.S. does.Finland, for example, introduced its child home-care allowance as part of a political compromise. It gives families with young children a choice between publicly provided daycare and financial support for at-home care. In this system, families can receive an allowance if their child is under 3 years old and not enrolled in municipal early childhood education. The basic payment is €377.68 per month, or about $429, with additional payments available for siblings. The caregiver can be a parent, a relative such as a grandparent, or a hired aide.But there may be shifts moving forward. Finland’s government recently proposed changes to its childcare laws to restrict eligibility for some newly arriving immigrant families beginning in 2027. Sanni Grahn-Laasonen, Finland’s former minister of social security, says the move aims to encourage parents of young children to enter the workforce and increase children’s participation in early childhood education. In fact, Finland is shifting toward Norway’s model, where a cash-for-care benefit is designed to give parents more time with their children, greater choice in how they arrange care, and more equal government support regardless of the type of care they use. Families with children between ages 13 and 19 months, not in publicly funded kindergarten, can receive a monthly allowance of 7,500 Norwegian kroner (about $780) for seven months. Those using it part time can receive a reduced payment.Ideological divideAmericans’ views on how the government should support parents, split along party lines for generations, have been thrown into sharp relief this election cycle amid rising costs and declining birth rates.Historically, Democrats have emphasized economic support to help parents rejoin the workforce, especially in low-income and single-parent households. In recent years, Republicans have splintered on the issue. Some conservatives support Mr. Vance’s stay-at-home model, others defend the CCDF state-choice distribution system, and still others argue the government shouldn’t put taxpayer funds toward childcare at all.A fundamental ideological difference stands in the breach. Some conservative groups, like the American Principles Project, view the current federal subsidy system as a failed experiment. They advocate instead for what APP president Terry Schilling calls the ideal model: “as much time as possible at home between the parents and their children.”Andrea Paluso, director of progressive advocacy group Child Care for Every Family Network, believes high and still-rising childcare costs stem from an underfunded system that places a heavy financial burden on parents, without enough support for childcare workers’ salaries. Her organization amplifies a message common among Democrats, a growing number of Republicans, and some European nations: that childcare should be funded as a “public good.” Deepen your worldviewwith Monitor Highlights.Politics with respectGet political stories with respectful analysis.There‘s a world of new ideas in everyBooks newsletter.There‘s more to life, enrich yours withCulture & Learning weekly.Follow humanity‘s discoveries withScience & Nature stories in your inbox.Gain a spiritual perspectivefrom the stories in your inbox.Want to understand the deeper impact of critical events? Learn the Monitor‘s insight.Already a subscriber? Log in to hide ads. Despite partisan divide and funding concerns, Ms. Paluso sees a growing national demand to address the problem on a larger scale.If citizens believe that a better system can be built, she says, then progress is possible. “That feels really optimistic.” ALREADY A SUBSCRIBER? LoginReal news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.The Christian Science Monitor was founded in 1908 to lift the standard of journalism and uplift humanity. We aim to “speak the truth in love.” Our goal is not to tell you what to think, but to give you the essential knowledge and understanding to come to your own intelligent conclusions. Join us in this mission by subscribing.