By Matt Underwood HHS freezes $10 billion in child care funding for 5 Democratic states, alleging fraudulent programs. This situation feels like a heavy-handed move, doesn’t it? Freezing such a significant amount of funding – $10 billion – for child care in five states, California, Colorado, Illinois, Minnesota, and New York, is a really big deal, especially when the reasoning cited is alleged fraudulent programs. It’s tough to digest, particularly when the impact is felt directly by children and families who rely on those programs.
The very act of targeting “Democratic States” feels un-American, a sentiment that resonates strongly. The idea that any state, regardless of its political leaning, isn’t a part of the whole is something that gets under your skin. The purpose of a president is to work for the *entire* country, not just a segment of it. It’s hard not to wonder why the focus is on penalizing *all* children, as a result of alleged fraud. The immediate question is, shouldn’t the priority be on helping children, especially if there are allegations of fraud?
There’s a significant concern about the potential waste of taxpayer dollars, with predictions of the funds being tied up in court battles, only to be reversed. This also begs the question of “accountability,” not the punitive measures. The thought that the administration is operating in bad faith and not actually caring about the children is just heart-wrenching. The frustration is understandable, especially when you see the money disappearing, not aiding the kids it was intended for.
The situation is a clear cut case of selective enforcement. The fact that the federal government writes the compliance supplement and determines monitoring activities makes it hard not to question the motive behind the freeze. Could the goal just be to punish states that didn’t vote the “right way?” The sledgehammer approach, instead of a more measured one, leaves a bad taste. Why punish everyone, not just those responsible for the fraud?
It feels as though this administration would prefer no one receive aid rather than allow even a single person to receive aid inappropriately. The move just reeks of partisan politics. A strongly worded letter won’t help in the face of this type of political gamesmanship. The idea of defederalization starts to sound more and more like a necessary option.
The notion of red states relying on blue state money is an old argument but it does bring into focus the inequity of the situation. Some states pay far more taxes than they receive in services. The states should reduce their federal contributions by the amount withheld. If the federal government is going to withhold the money, the states should get to decide how to spend it.
The sentiment is clear, this administration is doing a lot of things wrong and the voters are moving farther and farther away. The reality is that we’re stuck in a strange time. The full weight of the federal government seems to be actively working against its own people. This isn’t what should be happening in America.
The focus should be on an investigation. Going after the fraudsters, not the entire families or children that depend on the programs. When an administration knows how to fix the problems, but instead, they take radical measures, it’s concerning. One must wonder if all the effort and money are worth it when it’s just going to be tied up in the courts and end up being a wasted exercise.
The idea that the GOP will not win another election is becoming more common. And the reason is clear, they are not working for the entire country, only their supporters. If they win, they believe it gives them the right to attack their “enemies”. The sentiment that a Democrat could run on an identical policy platform to a Republican, and still lose, shows how deep the divide is. Republicans have never believed in bipartisanship in over 30 years and are stuck in the idea of total domination.