Skip to main content

By Wendy Chun-Hoon

Last night’s State of the Union address was the latest reminder of how the Trump Administration is devastating the lives of immigrants, workers, LGBTQ+ communities, children, families, and people of color by pushing them further to the margins. Last month, CLASP highlighted just a sampling of the administration’s actions and executive orders that target immigration, child care and early education, nutrition, economic supports, health care and mental health, housing, higher education, and workers’ rights. Trump demonstrated in his address that he plans to expand that 2025 playbook of destruction.

Despite Trump’s rhetoric about a “roaring economy,” this past year has been defined by cruelty, chaos, and a deliberate dismantling of the public benefit programs that families count on. His administration has manufactured crises, cut essential programs, and turned government agencies meant to serve all of us into tools of punishment and fear.

Massive Cuts to Public Benefit Programs

We heard lots of claims last night about the economy, but the ugly truth is that Trump has gutted the very programs that keep families healthy and fed. Last July, he signed H.R. 1, a sweeping law that will slash $793 billion from Medicaid and nearly $200 billion from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) over 10 years—the largest cuts to those programs in our nation’s history. Trump bragged that he “lifted” 2.4 million Americans off of food assistance. To be clear, this translates to 2.4 million people being dropped from SNAP in an average month. And as a result of H.R.1, millions of families have already begun losing coverage or benefits. These cuts will result in:

And while he vowed in his address to protect Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security, H.R. 1 included policies that would harm these programs.

Even the so-called “Trump Accounts,” which create $1,000 savings accounts for babies, are a mirage. They’ll widen the racial wealth gap by allowing wealthy families to enjoy the full benefits of the accounts, putting them even farther ahead of children in families who can’t afford to make added contributions to the initial amount.

The Trump Administration Has and Will Continue to Manufacture Crises

We can’t forget the manufactured government shutdown of late 2025, which was the longest in U.S. history. It wasn’t just a political stunt; it was an act of sabotage that threatened millions of families with the prospect of losing the SNAP and WIC benefits that allow them to keep food on the table. In addition, thousands of families who depend on Head Start faced closed doors at their centers, with many more facing the real possibility of closures. Moreover, the shutdown forced health insurance premiums to skyrocket after Congress let Affordable Care Act subsidies expire. When Trump boasts about a “turnaround for the ages,” remember: his austerity didn’t come at the expense of billionaires. It came at the expense of families.

The president continues to follow the playbook of bringing up fraud, even claiming last night that eliminating fraud would “balance the budget overnight.” We should take factual instances of fraud seriously and address them. But he’s using these allegations as a pretext to cut basic needs programs, demonize immigrants and families with low incomes, and as another strategy for taking away the help people need to care for themselves and their families.

Cruel Attacks on Immigrants

The most vivid example of the cruelty of Trump’s second term has been his relentless assault on immigrant families. Within weeks of taking office last year, his administration had unleashed indiscriminate enforcement actions, turning routine traffic stops into family separations and deportation threats. He reinstated family detention, removed restrictions on conducting immigration enforcement at sensitive locations like schools and hospitals, reopened the notorious family detention facility in Dilley, Texas, and is attempting to deny birthright citizenship—a direct attack on the 14th Amendment.

In his State of the Union, Trump claimed these measures were about “restoring safety.” But the only thing they’ve restored is fear. Mixed-status families are living with constant anxiety. Teachers have watched children burst into tears when a classmate’s parent fails to show up at pickup. Immigrant communities are skipping doctor’s appointments and food pantries because they’re terrified that they will be detained.  And to be clear, this indiscriminate and reckless immigration agenda is harming everyone. Administration officials are profiling and assaulting and detaining citizens and immigrants alike in communities across the country.

Disregard for Workers, People Pushed to the Margins

Trump has also undermined the rights of workers and students at every turn. His administration axed diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility programs across federal agencies and rescinded rules that made workplaces safe. The Department of Education reclassified nursing and social-work degrees as “non-professional,” making students ineligible for essential loan programs.

Although the president loves to describe himself as “pro-worker,” the thousands of laid-off federal workers and the millions of people now at risk of losing child care and housing support would disagree. In fact, throughout the longest State of the Union address ever, Trump said nothing to address the struggles everyday families face, for instance failing to mention the child care affordability crisis even once.

Fortifying the State of OUR Union

The State of the Union is supposed to be a moment for the nation to take stock and see who we are as a society. But Trump’s address was a work of fiction. The real state of our union is fragile, strained, and deeply unequal, not because families failed to work hard enough, but because the government failed to protect them.

Advocates who care about people who have been marginalized, along with everyday Americans have a choice in the months ahead: to accept this cruelty as normal or to demand better. We can start by amplifying the truth. Share reports like CLASP’s timeline of harm. Support local food banks, mutual-aid networks, and immigrant-rights groups doing the work that Washington refuses to do. And call on legislators to support policies that help, not undermine, our communities.

We must all fight because the state of our union—the one rooted in compassion, justice, and community—depends on what we do next.

In a podcast produced and hosted by First Focus on Children, Wendy Cervantes joins in an episode called, “Wendy Cervantes Demands Better Protections for Immigrant Kids.” She discusse how immigration enforcement policies are affecting children in immigrant families, with a focus on the fear, instability, and the lasting impact these policies can have on children’s development and well-being. She also talked about the broader effects on schools, communities, and family life, and why stronger protections are needed to keep children safe and supported. Watch or listen as she joined First Focus on Children’s podcast to dive deep on these issues.

By Rachel Wilensky

On February 3, 2026, Congress passed an amendment to the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2026, funding all federal programs with the exception of the Department of Homeland Security for a full year. President Trump subsequently signed the bill into law. The law offers small increases for many nondefense discretionary programs, including an additional $85 million for the Child Care and Development Block Grant (CCDBG). This increase was incredibly important, given the challenging fiscal environment states will face due to the cuts made to vital public benefit programs in H.R. 1.

CCDBG is a critical support for families with low incomes who, without access to assistance, would likely be unable to afford their current child care arrangements. However, due to limited federal funding, child care assistance funded through CCDBG and other federal sources only reached 15 percent of eligible children in 2021, the most recent year that data is available.1 The annual appropriations process is an important opportunity to increase federal investments in programs that respond to greater need and ensure funding keeps up with rising inflation.

As concerns about economic recovery, unemployment, and inflation persist, significant and sustained increases in annual discretionary funding remain a critical support. And, given the fragile nature of the child care sector caused in part by decades of insufficient federal funding, the need for long-term and sustainable increases for child care remains ever present.

Furthermore, recent actions by the administration to freeze or delay funding for child care and threaten programs like Head Start, which are a vital part of the child care and early education ecosystem, make this moment particularly volatile.2 Additionally, this $85 million increase for CCDBG does not keep pace with inflation, falling over $160 million short of what’s necessary to ensure there are enough resources to serve all children currently accessing care through CCDBG.3 This comes on top of stagnant funding in fiscal year (FY) 2025. Ultimately, this means that states will not be able to sustain their current costs, which may result in serving fewer children. Moreover, Congress’s massive cuts to food assistance, Medicaid, and other vital programs to pay for harsh immigration policies and offer tax cuts for billionaires and corporations will continue to harm children, families, and child care providers. These are, in many cases, the very same families impacted across numerous programs. As Congress engages in the FY27 appropriations process, it is essential that they protect programs families rely on and fight for investments that align with need, like urgent investments in child care.4 The following table provides each state’s estimated distribution of grant year (GY) 2026 annual discretionary funds.5

For questions, please contact Rachel Wilensky at rwilensky@clasp.org.

Download the report here. 

State

Estimates of GY2026 Discretionary Allocations[i]

GY2025 Discretionary Allocations

Estimated Increase from GY2025 to GY 2026

Alabama

$172,877,730

$171,213,823

$1,663,907

Alaska

$15,503,527

$15,354,309

$149,218

Arizona

$181,205,597

$179,461,536

$1,744,061

Arkansas

$102,172,155

$101,188,772

$983,383

California

$744,676,980

$737,509,641

$7,167,339

Colorado

$92,557,430

$91,666,587

$890,843

Connecticut

$64,045,803

$63,429,377

$616,426

Delaware

$23,822,438

$23,593,153

$229,285

District of Columbia

$13,539,118

$13,408,807

$130,311

Florida

$537,802,845

$532,626,620

$5,176,225

Georgia

$337,176,144

$333,930,904

$3,245,240

Hawaii

$29,104,960

$28,824,832

$280,128

Idaho

$45,307,035

$44,870,966

$436,069

Illinois

$270,465,225

$267,862,062

$2,603,163

Indiana

$200,310,276

$198,382,337

$1,927,939

Iowa

$85,385,918

$84,564,099

$821,819

Kansas

$78,936,160

$78,176,418

$759,742

Kentucky

$173,920,188

$172,246,248

$1,673,940

Louisiana

$168,210,656

$166,591,668

$1,618,988

Maine

$23,662,638

$23,434,891

$227,747

Maryland

$123,009,257

$121,825,322

$1,183,935

Massachusetts

$118,062,874

$116,926,547

$1,136,327

Michigan

$257,523,841

$255,045,235

$2,478,606

Minnesota

$120,482,527

$119,322,911

$1,159,616

Mississippi

$109,861,817

$108,804,423

$1,057,394

Missouri

$153,827,353

$152,346,801

$1,480,552

Montana

$22,381,572

$22,166,155

$215,417

Nebraska

$54,127,674

$53,606,708

$520,966

Nevada

$75,004,363

$74,282,464

$721,899

New Hampshire

$16,311,097

$16,154,107

$156,990

New Jersey

$162,953,218

$161,384,832

$1,568,386

New Mexico

$65,227,285

$64,599,488

$627,797

New York

$409,236,449

$405,297,645

$3,938,804

North Carolina

$281,501,322

$278,791,939

$2,709,383

North Dakota

$16,216,500

$16,060,420

$156,080

Ohio

$283,210,084

$280,484,254

$2,725,830

Oklahoma

$123,947,702

$122,754,735

$1,192,967

Oregon

$78,850,827

$78,091,907

$758,920

Pennsylvania

$274,267,735

$271,627,973

$2,639,762

Puerto Rico

$60,006,694

$59,429,144

$577,550

Rhode Island

$19,909,864

$19,718,236

$191,628

South Carolina

$160,049,619

$158,509,179

$1,540,440

South Dakota

$20,187,247

$19,992,950

$194,297

Tennessee

$192,923,197

$191,066,357

$1,856,840

Texas

$995,925,511

$986,339,965

$9,585,546

Utah

$84,602,064

$83,787,789

$814,275

Vermont

$10,212,916

$10,114,619

$98,297

Virginia

$189,684,896

$187,859,224

$1,825,672

Washington

$134,040,373

$132,750,266

$1,290,107

West Virginia

$56,788,709

$56,242,131

$546,578

Wisconsin

$127,268,052

$126,043,127

$1,224,925

Wyoming

$9,623,949

$9,531,321

$92,628

United States

$8,831,387,000[ii]

$8,746,387,000[iii]

$85,000,000[iv]

1 Nina Chien, “Estimates of Child Care Eligibility & Receipt for Fiscal Year 2021,” Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, September 2024, https://aspe.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/documents/a91fd97aa80b53fa52a52d38cd323509/cy2021-child-care-subsidy-eligibility.pdf.

2 Shira Small, Rachel Wilensky, and Stephanie Schmit, How the First Year of the Trump Administration Undermined Child Care and Early Education, Center for Law and Social Policy, January 2026, https://www.clasp.org/publications/fact-sheet/trump-admin-undermine-child-care-early-ed-programs-25/.

3 CLASP’s estimates are based on the Congressional Budget Office’s The Budget and Economic Outlook 2025-2035, published in January 2025. CLASP takes an average of the inflation rates looking at the change from year to year for both the Consumer Price Index for all urban consumers (CPI-u) and the Employment Cost Index (ECI) to conduct our estimate. These rates can be found in “Table C-1: CBO’s Economic Projections for Calendar Years 2025 to 2035,” Congressional Budget Office, January 2025, https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/2025-01/60870-Outlook-2025.pdf.

4 Fiscal Year (FY) refers to the period from October 1 through September 30 during which states and territories may spend funds awarded in the current and prior years. Grant Year (GY) refers to the year the funds were awarded, although states and territories may liquidate some Child Care Development Fund (CCDF) funding streams in later fiscal years. Note: CCDF refers to the federal funding sources for child care and is used interchangeably with CCDBG in this fact sheet.

5 CCDBG annual discretionary funds are distributed based on three main factors. The first two factors compare the ratio of the number of children in a state to the number of children in the country within the following categories: the number of children under five and the number of children who receive free or reduced priced lunch. The other factor makes a comparison of the three-year national per capita income with the three-year average state per capital income.

6 The state discretionary funding distributions are derived from “GY2024 CCDF Allocations (Based on Appropriations),” U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, current as of April 10, 2024, https://www.acf.hhs.gov/occ/data/gy-2024-ccdf-allocations-based-appropriations. Actual amounts may differ due to the Health & Human Services Secretary’s authority and discretion in set-aside funding and re-allocation of previous year’s resources.

7 This total includes funding for tribes and territories, as well as research, technical assistance, administration, hotlines, and websites in addition to the state funding outlined in the table. As a result, this total exceeds the sum of the state distribution.

8 Ibid.

9 Ibid.

CLASP and other national partners organized a sign-on letter and submitted comments on the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services on February 4, 2026.

NPRM sign-on letter Note: This sign-on collected 207 signatures from national, state, and local advocacy and membership organizations, unions, and child care programs.

CLASP and NWLC NPRM Comments

By Shira Small, Rachel Wilensky, and Stephanie Schmit

Updated January 23, 2026

Since taking office on January 20, 2025, the Trump Administration has repeatedly undermined families’ access to child care and early education—disproportionately harming families with low incomes and families of color—by forcing Head Start closures; sowing fear and uncertainty among children and families, particularly immigrants; and weakening the federal agencies that support early childhood programs. CLASP’s new fact sheet documents these actions, outlines efforts to defend critical programs, and makes clear the urgent need to protect providers, children, and families from further harm.

➲ EXPLORE FACT SHEET 

January 20, 2026, Washington, D.C. – The first year of Donald Trump’s second term has been marked by unprecedented attacks on economic, racial, and gender justice. In a new report titled “The First Year of Trump’s Second Term: Harms to Children, Families, and Workers,” the Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP) provides a sampling of how the Trump Administration has pushed immigrants, workers, LGBTQ+ communities, and people of color further to the margins. 

CLASP’s report is not intended to be a comprehensive list. Rather, it highlights a number of specific actions and executive orders in the areas of immigration, child care and early education, nutrition, economic supports, health care and mental health, housing, higher education, and workers’ rights. In addition to documenting the harms of this past year, the report offers an overview of responsive actions taken by communities, policymakers, and courts to withstand and counter the  administration’s constant attacks on children, families, and workers. Finally, it provides ways that individuals and communities can fight back against these attacks. 

“We know Trump’s playbook,” said Wendy Chun-Hoon, president and executive director of CLASP. “We know that firing federal workers and slashing the federal government is a blow to the health care and public services that all our families count on.” 

“We know that the funding bait and switch that’s canceled food and nutrition programs in order to expand ICE and ‘protect’ us is making all our child care centers and communities less safe. And we know that this playbook of harm, hypocrisy, and hate lines the pockets of Trump’s billionaire cronies while all the rest of our families struggle to pay for groceries and rent,” said Chun-Hoon.  

“CLASP is paying attention to the harm and fear being inflicted by the very people who should be supporting us. Our communities are paying attention. And we won’t stop fighting for what we know everyone needs to thrive,” she said  

The report is downloadable here.  

 

 

 

By Shira Small and Isha Weerasinghe

DOWNLOAD

Executive Summary

High maternal mortality rates and rising mental health stressors across the country underscore the need for policies, research, and programming that support maternal mental health and evaluate existing services, particularly for communities of color who face disproportionate barriers to accessing care.

This paper seeks to advance maternal mental health care and policy that best serves communities of color and other historically disenfranchised populations, highlighting both progress and opportunities for improvement.

Using Michigan and Colorado as case studies, the report analyzes key state-level policies and programs ascertained through informant interviews, focus groups, and background research to identify existing services, policies, funding streams, and the broader context in both states. Through this analysis, the authors aim to help policymakers develop, evaluate, and advance maternal mental health systems to eliminate inequities in their own states.

Inequities in Care

Barriers to maternal mental health care have deadly consequences. In Michigan, 81 percent of Black maternal deaths are preventable, and these inequities persist regardless of income level. In Detroit specifically, pregnant Black people are 2.2 times more at risk of maternal mortality than their white counterparts.

Similarly, in Colorado, pregnant Black and Indigenous people face the highest maternal mortality rates in the state, and almost 40 percent of Colorado counties are considered maternal health care deserts, meaning they lack a hospital, birth center, or obstetric care providers. Existing disparities and implementation challenges have been compounded by diminishing fiscal support from the federal government.

The Trump Administration’s 2025 budget package is expected to greatly deplete funding for federal health programs, including those serving communities of color, communities with low incomes, and other historically marginalized groups.

Many of the state-administered programs discussed in this report distribute federal funding to local communities, meaning their work is at risk. Current and upcoming federal funding cuts have already changed program infrastructure and will greatly impact the programs discussed in this report and the families they serve.

Michigan and Colorado

Maternal mental health is a rising policy priority in Michigan, with Governor Gretchen Whitmer’s leadership fueling legislative efforts to address maternal mortality inequities in the state. Positive policy developments include:

Colorado lawmakers have also achieved legislative momentum for maternal mental health, with the COVID-19 pandemic underscoring the need to better support new parents.

Efforts in the state legislature built on the creation of the Colorado Behavioral Health Task Force Governor Jared Polis commissioned in 2019, but strict budget limitations across the state have restricted progress.

Positive policy developments include:

Despite the increased awareness, interest, and policy development to improve maternal mental health in both states, key informants felt that their state still needs more policies in place to support birthing people’s needs and expand the supply of affordable, accessible, and culturally responsive care.

Amid efforts to improve the system, there can still be a disconnect between policymakers, providers, and directly impacted groups.

Maternal Mental Health Recommendations

The report makes recommendations to help states provide equitable care that prioritizes the well-being of people during the perinatal, pregnancy, and postpartum periods. They include, but are not limited to:

To read the full report, please reach out to Shira Small and Isha Weerasinghe.

This statement can be attributed to Wendy Chun-Hoon, president and executive director of the Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP). 

Washington, D.C., January 9, 2026 – This week, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has announced the withholding of funding for Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), the Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF) child care subsidies, and the Social Services Block Grant (SSBG) program from California, Colorado, Illinois, Minnesota, and New York. These states stand to lose a total of $10 billion in federal funding this year for allegations of fraud. And the administration has already signaled that broader cuts may be coming. 

Arbitrarily withholding federal funds from these five states is illegal, reckless, and cruel. While instances of fraud should be taken seriously, these unilateral actions to freeze funding for basic needs programs cause widespread harm. In fact, there is no evidence to prove the alleged claims. Programs already have extensive built-in mechanisms for managing allegations, ranging from detailed state plans outlining intentions for how resources will be utilized to extensive reporting and audit requirements.  

TANF provides families who have very low incomes with temporary monthly cash assistance, work activities and support, and child care services. Children and families will bear the brunt of these cuts, while already facing an affordability crisis and cuts to other critical public benefit programs, like SNAP and Medicaid. Without TANF funding, families with low incomes won’t have access to monthly cash assistance that helps parents afford essentials like rent, diapers, and groceries. 

Freezing CCDF funds for child care centers and family child care homes will threaten providers’ ability to provide services and keep their doors open, which will challenge access to care for parents. Most programs operate on razor-thin margins with limited or no reserves. This comes on top of all states being required by the “defend the spend” directive to provide detailed justification to draw down resources to support child care subsidies. 

SSBG freezes will not only impact child care but also local health services, services for vulnerable and elderly adults, services for individuals with disabilities, and more.   

This all comes at a time when states face an increasingly challenging budgetary environment, especially as they begin to implement mandatory changes in SNAP and other programs specified in H.R. 1, which narrowly passed last July and creates new barriers to food assistance and health coverage that will leave millions hungry and uninsured. Moreover, the increased costs of health coverage follow the failure of Congress and the administration to extend the enhanced premium tax credits for the ACA Marketplace. Families are already experiencing increased costs of living. The administration’s persistence in further burdening families by stripping away supports that allow them to thrive will have devastating consequences for all our communities and states.  

The Trump Administration is using politically motivated, racist, and anti-immigrant commentary to villainize those who oppose them and excuse the illegal withholding of federal funding. Children, families, and child care providers will suffer from these actions. Moreover, state administrators of these programs are already facing confusion and chaos, adding to the existing burden of navigating the barrage of regulatory contradictions from the administration. HHS should reverse this decision and provide all states with their funding to serve children and families.  

 

By Grace Segers

(EXCERPT)

“They’re not going to have access to health insurance, they’re not going to have access to food, and now are going to have a challenging time accessing childcare. It’s going to be multiple hits to families who already are in a position where they need support,” said Schmit. “I see this as, on the whole … something that’s really aiming to undermine the needs of families with low incomes in this country.”

Read the full article on The New Republic. 

BY SOPHIA PAFFENROTH/MISSISSIPPI TODAY

(EXCERPT)

Other states have successfully conjoined funding streams so that extra TANF funds can be used on child care vouchers without technically being considered “transferred funds,” explained Stephanie Schmit, director of Child Care and Early Education at the Center for Law and Social Policy. It can sometimes be complicated.

Read the full article from the Associated Press.