Trump Suggests States Should Fund Childcare, Not Federal Government

President's remarks at White House luncheon spark backlash from advocates concerned about impact on families and providers

Apr. 4, 2026 at 10:06am

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

During a White House Easter luncheon, President Donald Trump said he didn't think the federal government should pay for childcare and that states should take care of it instead. Trump's comments were quickly criticized by advocates representing both parents and childcare providers, who argued that the federal government has an essential role to play in subsidizing childcare for low-income families.

Why it matters

The federal government currently provides the majority of funding for state childcare subsidy programs, which help make care affordable for millions of families. Trump's suggestion to shift this responsibility to the states raises concerns about the potential impact on access to childcare, especially for lower-income families, and the ability of states to make up for the loss of federal support.

The details

At the luncheon, Trump said he told the director of the Office of Management and Budget not to send any money for daycare, arguing that the federal government can't take care of it and that states should pay for it instead. Trump claimed that states would need to raise taxes to cover the cost. The federal government currently provides around 70% of the funding for state childcare subsidy programs, which serve nearly 1.5 million children nationwide. Shifting this responsibility to the states would be extremely difficult, as Michigan's House Fiscal Agency estimates the state would need to make up a $380 million gap to continue the program as is.

  • On April 1, Trump made the remarks about federal childcare funding during a White House Easter luncheon.
  • Earlier this year, Republican lawmakers, including Michigan state Sen. Aric Nesbitt, called for investigations into alleged fraud in state childcare subsidy programs, following a viral video making unverified claims about fraud in Minnesota.

The players

President Donald Trump

The President of the United States who made the remarks about the federal government not needing to fund childcare programs.

Russell Vought

The director of the federal Office of Management and Budget, to whom Trump said he told not to send any money for daycare.

Erin Erenberg

The CEO of the Chamber of Mothers, a nationwide nonprofit advocating for mothers' rights in the United States, who criticized Trump's remarks.

Jared Rodriguez

The executive director of the Childcare Providers Association of Michigan, who said Trump's remarks shift the burden onto families, providers, and local communities.

Aric Nesbitt

A Michigan state senator who called for an investigation into the state's childcare subsidy program earlier this year and is running for governor in 2026.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“Childcare is not just 'day care' and it's not a niche problem. There is no one-size-fits-all answer, but there is also no version of this country thriving while we pretend this isn't our government's problem to address.”

— Erin Erenberg, CEO of the Chamber of Mothers

“The majority of parents must work. Businesses rely on a stable workforce. And children deserve safe, consistent, high-quality care. Framing childcare as optional or suggesting it should be deprioritized shifts the burden onto families, providers, and local communities that are already operating at capacity.”

— Jared Rodriguez, Executive Director of the Childcare Providers Association of Michigan

“If we are serious about lowering costs and strengthening our workforce, we cannot leave families to figure this out on their own.”

— Hillary Scholten, U.S. Representative, D-Grand Rapids

What’s next

The judge in the case will decide on Tuesday whether or not to allow Walker Reed Quinn out on bail.

The takeaway

This case highlights growing concerns in the community about repeat offenders released on bail, raising questions about bail reform, public safety on SF streets, and if any special laws to govern autonomous vehicles in residential and commercial areas.