Thank you for the links,
@boarder42. It was unclear to me what was going on with this aspect of the infrastructure act and this helped clarify some things. Our country is so behind the curve on anything resembling Universal Childcare, and this looks like it will mostly mitigate the rough situation we collectively are in, and help a fair amount. Other civilized countries have had decent plans in place for decades. This benefits parents, employers and yes, taxpayers. If as a country we want citizens to have less dependence on social programs like SNAP and housing assistance, then having a way for parents of young children to be able to be employed while not having huge amounts going to childcare is a very good thing.
I was born in the second half of the 1970s. My Vietnam vet dad went back to college to learn a better craft and my mother went to work for the state. As soon as she took the job, where her take-home was about $500 per month, she found out she was having another baby (me). Because we lived in groovy-liberal at the time Oregon, I was placed in high-quality infant care at 6 weeks, and my older sisters remained in an after-school program. All subsidized by the state, with my parents paying on a sliding scale. They progressed and succeeded; I was in child care until mid-elementary and loved it.
As a newly minted widowed working parent in 2008, I paid exhorbant fees for childcare for my youngest. My oldest didn't need it and I juggled work hours around the middle child's elementary school hours. I wouldn't have fucking minded a little bit of childcare assistance in those years!
We really need to step up and invest in our society. The things that concern families, and the elderly should be top of the list. We have the resources, we always have. Off my soapbox and back for another read of the initiative.