Trump Is Right To Help The Married Parents Who Vote Republican

The New York Times reported last week that Trump administration officials are drafting a rule that would allow some number of low-income, married, stay-at-home parents to become eligible for federal childcare subsidies that have long gone toward single parents or two-income households. This would serve as part of a broader effort to end government discrimination against stay-at-home parents. The story described Vice President J.D. Vance as the main champion of the idea, which triggered the usual derangement among his most prolific online detractors.

Needless to say, this was not an idea endorsed by Americans for Tax Reform or the Competitive Enterprise Institute. 

But is this proposal “big government?” Or “postliberal?” Or “socialism?” Or perhaps some other -ism? Or maybe a combination of all the -isms? It’s hard to keep track.

Honestly — and I say this as someone who tends to care a great deal about details — who cares about the specifics? The president and his administration have recognized that the affordability crisis, which has been brewing for decades due to the failures of both parties, is real and hurting our voters the most. Help is finally on the way.

Many are critiquing the merit or the cost of this proposal. And that’s fine. This is an early concept that hasn’t yet been fleshed out by the pressure cooker that is Congress. But directionally, there’s no question the administration is heading down the right path.

Who Are Our Voters?

Back in 2019, my organization, American Principles Project, released a report called “Family First: Reclaiming the GOP’s Forgotten Constituency.” The report analyzed voter patterns from the 2018 midterm elections, which notably did not go well for the GOP. What we found was striking: Marital status, more than race and sex, was the most significant predictor of whether someone would vote for a Republican or a Democrat.

Among voters aged 20-65, the GOP lost married voters by 5 points, but it got absolutely trounced with divorced voters (19 points), cohabiting voters (44 points), and never-married voters (45 points). Black and Hispanic married voters were more than two times as likely to vote GOP as their unmarried peers. Those numbers extended to children as well. Minority children from intact families were also twice as likely to vote for the Republican candidate as their peers from broken families. These patterns translated similarly to social attitudes on abortion, marriage, transgenderism, and pornography. And this trend among married voters held up in subsequent elections, including in 2024.

So what is the lesson here? Should Republicans work harder to appeal to cohorts that are voting against them by 45 points? Of course not. Instead, we should focus on persuading and turning out our voters: married voters.

Reviving the American Dream

The best way to do that is to tailor our messaging toward what our voters care about the most: surviving the increased cost of living and providing a better life for their kids. We don’t need to “outbid” the Democrats; we just need to bring table stakes to the game. Talk about affordability, propose reasonable solutions to help make our voters’ lives better, and then contrast our normal views on hot-button cultural issues with Democrats’ pure insanity.

A recent Wall Street Journal-NORC poll found that faith in the American Dream, and therefore faith in American capitalism, is on life support. Nearly 70 percent of people said they believe the American dream — that if you work hard, you will get ahead — either no longer holds true or never did.

This is a five-alarm fire that the market fundamentalists on the right are incapable of wrestling with. Their answer is more tax cuts, more deregulation, more bootstrap conservatism. That won’t get you far when 70 percent of the country doesn’t buy what you’re selling.

Thankfully, there is a viable alternative right in front of us: bringing back the American dream by reorienting the economy, the government, and the tax code toward promoting family formation. 

How does the stay-at-home parent issue factor into that calculus? Simple. Part of the American dream is the idea that you can raise a family on a single income. Polling consistently shows a preference across the country for parents to stay at home and take care of children. One poll from the AP-NORC found that 79 percent of respondents felt it was either a high priority or a moderate priority for the federal government to “mak[e] it easier for parents to leave the workforce to raise their children.” Another poll from a year ago showed that 63 percent of voters believe families are better off with one parent staying home with the children.

If the main roadblock stopping families from having one stay-at-home parent is financial, remove the roadblock, and you alleviate some of the greatest hurdles preventing strong family formation. With such a large portion of the country in support, it’s no wonder the Trump administration is stepping up to the plate. 

In a crucial election year, the Trump administration is making a move families will feel for generations. There is still much work to be done — reorienting the economy in a more pro-family direction, reworking the tax code in the same direction with child tax credits, providing baby bonuses, and eliminating marriage penalties — but allowing parents to raise their children and not hire out an understaffed daycare to do the job for them is an enormous step in the right direction.

Jon Schweppe is the director of policy and government affairs at American Principles Project. Follow him on Twitter @JonSchweppe.