Donald Trump Unveils Child Care Subsidy Aimed at Women, Suburban Swing Voters (Mandatory Paid Maternity Leave)

[LMAO]

I'm not surprised at all by Trump's return to more left leaning positions. It wasn't a secret from a guy who said this about a decade ago

"In Many Cases I Probably Identify More As Democrat", 3.21.04.

Here's the issues I have with all this. First,  it wont be deficit neutral. In the near future, we are going to have to face and tackle our precarious  fiscal situation. This is certainly not the time to promise more government programs. Also, this encourages the mindset in the public that we need government to help us face hardships that other generations figured out how to do on their own. It increases dependency. And these programs have a way of growing and politicians making the public additional promises through them.

This isn't going to attract Hillary voters to Trump, anyways. Democrats always win at the give a way game despite the GOP's efforts to compete with them at that game

[LMAO]

Let Mrs. Clinton make the same exact proposal and those defending this now would be gnashing teeth and screaming 'Socialism"

[geronl]

Good thing Trump's proposal doesn't do that then isn't it?

His is even worse

[INVAR]

I note that Ronald Reagan's picture is on this website's header, but that many who post here against the Republican candidate have absolutely no respect for the Eleventh Commandment.

Neither does Trump, and neither do the rabid Trump militants that to this hour, continue to bash Cruz and anyone who will not kiss Trump's ring.

So the attempted shaming is for naught on your part.

Bottom line is that if Mark Levin and Larry Elder can vote for Trump and not have conniptions or tear their beards, then so can I. 

Most of us do not base our votes or our principles on what some blowhard on radio says they plan to do.  Lost of Christian pastors that many flock to are emphatically embracing Islam or Homosexual marriage.  Doesn't mean the rest of us are going to go apostate simply because those leaders choose to.

So many of you nice folks non-political posts are fair, reasonable, interesting, objective, brilliant and fascinating. But when it comes to Trump, so many seemed to wax overly-emotional (intuitive) and behave as if he slapped their Momma.

That would be due the fact that we judge the fruits - and we eschew charlatans and those claiming to be of the faith, but are not.  In short, because we understand deception - we beware of false messiahs and false teachers both religious and political.  We reject having a lifelong Liberal NYC Democrat advocating Leftist policies as his own, shoved down our throats because some of you pronounce he is a Conservative.

All of this agonizing and setting of hair on fire is becoming alarming. Particularly when the margin of victory in many battleground states will be razor thin and Trump will need every vote he can get to counter leftist voter fraud (which likely will be historically high this election).

I can care less.  I fear Trump more than Hillary with my liberty. 

I'm working overtime to get everyone I can reach to vote for the Constitution party or to write in a Conservative in November. 

[ABX]

I will give it to Kellyanne Conway, she is at least getting Trump to make good speeches. However, I would like to find anyone to tell me how this is a Conservative position:

....That includes paid maternity and paternity leave, sick leave, accommodations for workers who are pregnant, good health care, affordable child care, flexibility at work...... We ask our mothers to do more than their fair share of just about everything. Making sure they’re treated fairly is the least we can do.....

Please, ping me to the explanation.

[Longmire]

It is not offset.  "Waste, fraud, and abuse" from the Unemployment Insurance program is a solution from someone who has no solution.  It's never worked before and Trump can't make it work.

The full proposal hasn't even been put forward yet and it will be part of a more comprehensive tax reform plan Trump will be detailing on Thursday with a speech to the Economic Club.

So save your "it won't work" rhetoric until then ok?

[LMAO]

I will give it to Kellyanne Conway, she is at least getting Trump to make good speeches. However, I would like to find anyone to tell me how this is a Conservative position:

Please, ping me to the explanation.

So we have the promise of punitive tariffs and taxes on companies that make business decisions that don't go along with Mr Trump's demands, promises of more stimulus and debt, and more mandates on businesses. And all this is suppose to grow the economy, how?

[Right_in_Virginia]

Yep, I am a bit old fashion about that. I always thought it was the parents responsibility to provide for the offspring etc...

And they will be .... the parents decide whether or not to direct their income to a dependent care account and how to use the money.  The benefit for choosing to direct income in this way is a reduction in taxes.  Choice for parents and lower taxes:   Is this not a conservative's dream?

The Trump plan will exclude childcare costs from the income tax from birth to age 13, the period where children need supervised care, and will include adoptive parents as well as foster parents who are legal guardians of the child. The exclusion (also known as an above-the-line deduction) will cover up to 4 children per family.

The exclusion would apply to a variety of different kinds of childcare—institutional, private, nursery school, afterschool care, and enrichment activities—affording choice to parents. The deduction would be limited to the average cost of childcare in the state of residence for the age of the child.

Importantly, the benefit would be provided to families who use stay-at-home parents or grandparents as well as those who use paid caregivers. This would level the playing field for parents when it comes to determining what’s in a family’s best interest. It would also be a belated recognition by the federal government of the economic value of the work provided by stay-at-home parents.

.../

Create Child Care Savings Accounts (my edit:  untied from employment income)

After finding the right care for their circumstances, families should also have an option to set aside extra money to further foster their child’s development. The Trump plan will provide Americans the option of opening dependent care savings accounts (DCSAs) so that they can plan for future expenses relating to child and elder care.

Annual contributions to a dependent care savings account and earnings on the account will not be subject to tax. Immediate family members and employers will also be able to set aside funds in these accounts, which will be established for the benefit of specific individuals, including unborn children. Total contributions could not exceed $2,000 per year from all sources, but balances in a DCSA will rollover from year-to-year so that substantial amounts could be accumulated over a period of years. 

Furthering our conservative principles is the introduction of greater choice and parental control over child/eldercare:

Create a new, dynamic market for family-based and community-based solutions

Finding quality childcare is a challenge, particularly in low-income and rural communities. The Trump plan will reduce regulations that disproportionately favor center-based care to create a new, dynamic market for family-based and community-based solutions. Families will be given the power and information to choose who will be providing care and where that care will be provided without fear of loss of government benefits. The marketplace will be free to develop alternatives that provide care where needed, and at the times when people who work irregular hours need care. 

The lack of choice limits options for people who work irregular hours and those who live in rural communities where choices for center-based care are not available nearby. Federal regulations already in the pipeline likely will limit choices further. Devolving regulatory authority to the states to set guidelines appropriate to the needs of its residents for items like staffing and facility size would be a priority in the Trump administration.

https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions/child-care-reforms-that-will-make-america-great-again

[Right_in_Virginia]

This is the liberal mindset that  we need a government program to "solve" all of life's difficulties. You're also using the same type of statement that the left used against those who opposed Obamacare.  Which is further proof that underneath every Trump supporter is a leftist waiting to get out

This is not, @LMAO a government program.  The government is not providing the care and it is not a government subsidy.

The child/eldercare plan proposed by Donald Trump incorporates three ideals:  lower taxes on individual contributions to their own personal account, greater choice for parents, increased competition through expanded care covered through the plan.

Lower taxes, choice, increased competition---are these not the three pillars of fiscal conservatism?

And if these three pillars applied to child/eldercare help the American family, why object to it?

[Optiguy]

The proposal also calls for providing six weeks of paid maternity leave through unemployment benefits to parents whose employers don’t offer paid maternity leave.

The alternative would be to pay unemployment benefits to the mother for a longer period after she loses her job for not being available to work due to her pregnancy. The Trump approach may also keep single mothers off welfare by providing an incentive to stay employed.

Hard to see how this doesn't score well with values voters.

Here's a value: It's my money! What makes you think redistributing wealth is okay?

[Right_in_Virginia]

Good thing Trump's proposal doesn't do that then isn't it?

You have the patience of a saint @Longmire.

[Right_in_Virginia]

Here's a value: It's my money! What makes you think redistributing wealth is okay?

What @Optiguy, exactly, is YOUR money in all of this?

[Suppressed]

The benefit for choosing to direct income in this way is a reduction in taxes.  Choice for parents and lower taxes:   Is this not a conservative's dream?

No, it is most definitely not a conservative's dream.  Conservatives don't believe the government should pick winners and losers, nor penalize people with higher taxes if they don't redirect their money the way the government wants.

If it costs $X to run the government and you cut one person's taxes and not others, the others have to unfairly make up the difference. That's about as anti-conservative as you can get.

@Right_in_Virginia

[LMAO]

Here's a part in the link that RIV posted that was either conveniently avoided or just ignored altogether. I'm anticipating how this will be spun as a "conservative position."



Provide 6 weeks of maternity leave to new mothers

The United States is the only developed country that does not provide cash benefits for new mothers. According to the U.S. Department of Labor: “Only 12 percent of U.S. private sector workers have access to paid family leave through their employer”. Each year, 1.4 million women who work give birth without any paid leave from their employer.

The Trump plan will enhance Unemployment Insurance (UI) to include 6 weeks of paid leave for new mothers so that they can take time off of work after having a baby. This would triple the average 2 weeks of paid leave received by new mothers, which will benefit both the mother and the child.

Providing a temporary unemployment benefit for eight weeks through the UI system would cost $2.5 billion annually at an average benefit of $300 per week. This cost could be offset through changes in the existing UI system, such as by reducing the $5.6 billion per year in improper payments or implementing the proposals included in the administration’s FY 2017 budget regarding program integrity.

https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions/child-care-reforms-that-will-make-america-great-again

[Right_in_Virginia]

THIS is why conservatives can't get elected dog catchers.  Step back and read the tortured logic you've used @LMAO---all to prevent new working mothers from receiving 6 weeks pay, keeping them off unemployment and welfare and giving them an incentive to return to work.

[LMAO]

No, it is most definitely not a conservative's dream.  Conservatives don't believe the government should pick winners and losers, nor penalize people with higher taxes if they don't redirect their money the way the government wants.

If it costs $X to run the government and you cut one person's taxes and not others, the others have to unfairly make up the difference. That's about as anti-conservative as you can get.

@Right_in_Virginia

Lol

It appears that alot of positions that  were conservative ones for several decades had to be, shall we say, "adjusted and adapted" in the last several months

[Optiguy]

What @Optiguy, exactly, is YOUR money in all of this?

@Right_in_Virginia I suppose I must now explain economics 101 to you if you don't grasp the concept. Who has the rightt to spend my money (which represents my labor and time) on things and circumstances which are brought about through choices others have made in which I have no say. Additionally, I do not seek to tell others what choices they must make, but somehow, I'm forced to subsidize them. Do you also believe "free" medical care, "free" tuition, "free" school lunches... are really free?

[DB]

And they will be .... the parents decide whether or not to direct their income to a dependent care account and how to use the money.  The benefit for choosing to direct income in this way is a reduction in taxes.  Choice for parents and lower taxes:   Is this not a conservative's dream?

Furthering our conservative principles is the introduction of greater choice and parental control over child/eldercare:

https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions/child-care-reforms-that-will-make-america-great-again

Where exactly is it enumerated in the constitution that the federal government has the authority to mandate all this crap on employers? Be it health care or maternity leave, much less overtime or anything else?

You already accept the premise of big government in our lives and are only debating who to impose your will on via your vote. You are far afield from anything involving liberty, conservative principles and a constitutional Republic.

[DB]

The paid leave is fully offset in the proposal so no hiring decisions will be affected.

Read the proposal and see for yourself or remain ignorant, its your choice.

You've obviously never run a business with employees.

[Longmire]

You've obviously never run a business with employees.

On the contrary...I'm well aware of the financial decision making process that takes place around hiring.

For example, Coffin Hillary would NOT be someone my firm would hire...despite her lengthy resume 

[Night Hides Not]

The paid leave is fully offset in the proposal so no hiring decisions will be affected.

Read the proposal and see for yourself or remain ignorant, its your choice.

Fraud in unemployment programs is estimated at $4 billion a year. You won't squeeze enough out of that to "offset" Trump's plan.

[GrouchoTex]

No, it is most definitely not a conservative's dream.  Conservatives don't believe the government should pick winners and losers, nor penalize people with higher taxes if they don't redirect their money the way the government wants.

If it costs $X to run the government and you cut one person's taxes and not others, the others have to unfairly make up the difference. That's about as anti-conservative as you can get.

@Right_in_Virginia

Nor is it Constitutional, but I do not think that matters to some anymore.

Face it, this is a 100% liberal position, period.
If you like Trump, and want to sell the idea, fine, but realize this is a position the Democrats have been pushing for years, and it equates to Government payout for maternity leave, a liberal position. Trump has some conservative positions and some liberal positions. This is one of his liberal positions.

I don't think this passes the "equal protection" status.
If you are single with no children, or unable to conceive, or past child bearing age, you cannot take advantage of this.
If it is not struck down, and taken to a logical conclusion, it could change to everyboby get six weeks off, every year, government paid.
Welcome to Europe.
If I want to be European, I'd move there.
Heck, let's just go over to England, tell them we are sorry, that we really didn't mean what we said in 1776 and ask to be part of England again.

[Night Hides Not]

How is Trump any different from Hillary?

I'll laugh when Ivanka persuades Trump to turn pro-choice a month from now.

I sure hope Ivanka hasn't read Atlas Shrugged, she might put a bug in his ear about how "amazing" Directive 10-289 would be in her daddy's hands.

[Just_Victor]

I sure hope Ivanka hasn't read Atlas Shrugged, she might put a bug in his ear about how "amazing" Directive 10-289 would be in her daddy's hands.

I remember when Clinton signed the Family and Medical Leave Act in 1993, Rush Limbaugh was saying that this was only the beginning, since many women couldn't afford 12 weeks without pay.  Liberals were going to have to come back and demand leave with pay.

Well, it looks like Rush was right, and the liberals have come back to demand that the time away be paid.

[GrouchoTex]

I remember when Clinton signed the Family and Medical Leave Act in 1993, Rush Limbaugh was saying that this was only the beginning, since many women couldn't afford 12 weeks without pay.  Liberals were going to have to come back and demand leave with pay.

Well, it looks like Rush was right, and the liberals have come back to demand that the time away be paid.

It's that good old "slippery slope".