State must not let subsidies die for those in need

Jul. 19, 2010 12:00 AM

The Arizona Republic

Child-care subsidies for the working poor are a rational response to a real need. This fact collided with a state budget deficit that required tough cuts. The crash left Arizona’s child-care subsidy program on life support.

It should not be allowed to fade away.
As the number of children being served shrinks and the waiting list of eligible children grows, Arizona needs to take a look at what can be done to preserve this program, which shows a commitment to things that are highly valued in our society: hard work and family.

For people with good-paying jobs, child care takes a big, but unavoidable bite out of the family budget.

For low-income earners, the cost of safe child care – as much as $5,000 to $8,000 a year per child – can be out of reach. Without a subsidy from the state, these working families can be forced to give up work or put children in unsafe settings.

Since February 2009, when Arizona imposed a waiting list for working families seeking child-care subsidies, the number of children in the state program went from about 48,000 children to 31,900 this April, according to the Department of Economic Security. If the waiting list is maintained, the number served will drop to 27,600 by December, says Steve Meissner, director of communications for the DES.

By that time, the number of children who are eligible but are not allowed in the program will exceed 19,000. Currently, about 10,300 are on the waiting list, with an additional 4,000 eligible but not included on the list.

Bruce Liggett, executive director of the Arizona Child Care Association, says calling it a “waiting list” is a benign description that creates the impression of a “one child out, one child in” process.

In fact, for the working poor, the waiting list is really a turn-away list, he says.
Liggett says that if the number of children served continues to shrink, the program could lose federal matching money.

The state continues to face a deficit, and more tough decisions will have to be made. But preserving a program that includes a big federal match makes sense.

Moving children off the waiting list and into the program to maintain the current level of funding would be a good temporary solution. When economic times improve in the state, the goal should be to increase investment in a program that helps keep children safe while parents work.