Skip to main content

By Kaelin Rapport

The first observance of Earth Day was held 55 years ago. Originally envisioned as large-scale public protests to raise awareness of environmental threats, Earth Day now promotes environmental conservation and sustainable energy. That reminder is more necessary than ever as the Trump Administration reduces the federal budget through mass layoffs at government agencies, including those that have historically protected the environment, and pushes executive orders that will devastate the environment and marginalized communities. 

Climate Change and Environmental Racism

The actions of President Trump, his appointees, and the Department of Government Efficiency are part of a strategy to roll back regulations protecting the environment. These partisan decisions attack validated climate science and allow the federal government to evade responsibility for perpetuating environmental racism in the pursuit of short-term economic gains.

Researchers at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) determined racial minorities are the most likely to live in areas predicted to be adversely affected by climate change. Majority non-white communities and communities that are predominately composed of families with low incomes suffer more from storm and flood events, extreme heat, infectious disease, and disruptions to labor markets, all of which are occurring more frequently because of climate change. Immigrant families are distinctly vulnerable to being excluded from health care policies, which can make it difficult to receive assistance to address environmental hazards. Research has connected higher temperatures, humidity, and vapor pressure with increases in mental distress, visits to the emergency room, and exposure to environmental-related trauma. Black people in particular are 40 percent more likely than other racial minority groups to live in areas with the highest projected mortality rates due to extreme temperatures.

Federal Cuts and Deregulation  

Despite the depth and breadth of data signaling a need to address climate change and environmental racism head-on, the administration has taken alarming measures to accelerate global warming and extreme weather changes. On the first day of his second term, President Trump signed an executive order to initiate withdrawing the U.S. from the Paris Accords for the second time. The Paris Accords represent an international climate initiative to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Also on his first day in office, Trump signed the executive order “Unleashing American Energy,” which called for the removal of 100 environmental regulations, including limiting carbon dioxide emissions from power plants, cars, and trucks; limiting wildlife protections; and making more land available for corporations to drill for oil and gas. According to the Trump Administration, both orders removed barriers placed by the Biden Administration between the country’s natural resources and its prosperity.

The hunt for economic gains also led to the administration firing thousands of federal employees, which hit agencies like the National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) particularly hard. NOAA employed 13,000 people and used advanced technology across thousands of institutions to gather data on the weather and climate. NOAA also serves as the quality control for this data and developed weather prediction models, which it used to coordinate with the Federal Emergency Management Agency, another agency expected to fire staffers soon.

Since the start of the current administration, roughly 10 percent of NOAA’s staff have been cut or taken a deferred resignation. Fewer federal employees means that less meteorological data will be collected nationwide, which in turn means forecasts will be less accurate. That also means that the Trump Administration is sacrificing the people and communities most vulnerable to climate change in the interest of presumed short-term economic gain. Even if NOAA is totally dismantled, the federal government would only save a projected 0.097 percent of the $6.75 trillion the government spent in 2024. Compared to the 27 weather or climate disaster events in 2024, each causing over $1 billion in damages and a combined 568 deaths,  those savings are inconsequential.

Needed Protections

NOAA’s official stance on climate change is that the impacts of climate change and extreme weather have reached every region of the United States. Research backs up this stance; in 2024, researchers at Yale University and George Mason University conducted a study on American sentiment toward climate change. They determined that the majority of Americans believe in and are fearful of climate change. Furthermore, they want schools to teach about global warming and for clean energy to be a priority for Congress and the president. Last year was also the first year that the world passed the 1.5°C of warming over pre-industrial levels that the Paris Climate Accord uses as a marker to avoid freefalling into an irreparable climate catastrophe.

Continuing to fight these illegal federal agency layoffs and environmental deregulation efforts will mitigate climate change and reduce human and economic costs, especially for historically marginalized communities. Other ways to help mitigate the impact are by supporting the efforts of organizations like the Center for Health, Environment & Justice, which offers organizing, policy analysis, and research training in communities hit by environmental degradation. Finally, the voices of those from communities that have been and will continue to be most affected by climate change must be included in disaster relief programming, along with the work of grassroots organizations and activists and researchers who have been in the field for decades. 

More information on environmental justice groups in your area can be found in the Environmental Justice Atlas.  

April 11-17, 2025  is Black Maternal Health Week. For more information and resources, please see here.

By Isha Weerasinghe

The prenatal and postpartum periods are some of the most vulnerable times a person can experience, and the shift in roles and responsibilities can cause a great deal of stress and anxiety. These periods can bring new perspectives and symptoms to parents that they may not have been prepared for, including complications in pregnancy and delivery leading to a demanding recovery; being unable to breastfeed or afford baby formula; and a significant lack of sleep, among other difficulties. Any of these factors can significantly contribute to adverse impacts on a new parent’s mental health. The Trump Administration’s recent cuts to federal agency staff and elimination of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs will only compound these challenges.

The administration’s actions around DEI, cutting grants, and consolidating federal departments are already having significant effects on health funding. States are experiencing the results of cutting more than $12 billion in federal grants related to the impacts of COVID-19, resulting in potential cuts of millions of dollars for mental health services in states like New York, Utah, and Wisconsin. Significant changes and eliminated departments within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS), including firing staff in the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and Health Resources and Services Administration and then shifting the agencies to the Administration for a Healthy America umbrella; eliminating the Office of Minority Health; funding cuts to state and city offices including in the Office of Civil Rights; and eliminating regional offices that work to reduce health disparities all have severely negative impacts on mental health outcomes. Among the casualties will be less research into and data on how race, ethnicity, and gender factor into mental health outcomes; a reduction in funding for culturally responsive programming; little to no enforcement of antidiscrimination rules; and fewer resources to hire a diverse set of providers to serve people who are pregnant, both in terms of expertise/experience and cultural background. All of these elements are critical to address maternal mental health inequities.

As it stands, pregnant women[1] of color often feel high levels of distrust with health systems. This is due to high maternal mortality rates among Black and Indigenous women, known past and present sterilization practices across the country, and stories of children being taken away from their parents. Implicit bias among providers, well known among many communities of color, also affects the communication between provider and patient and impacts the quality of care. For many immigrant communities with limited English proficiency, cultural and linguistic barriers between pregnant women and their providers can make prenatal care, delivery, and postpartum care more complicated.

All of this can lead to increased stress and anxiety throughout pregnancy and the postpartum period. Twenty-nine to 44 percent of Black women experience postpartum depressive symptoms, and very few report accessing necessary mental health services. Indigenous women have 87 percent higher odds of developing postpartum depression than white women. Collectively, about one in five American Indian,[2] and Alaska Native, Asian, or Pacific Islander,[3] and Black women report symptoms of perinatal depression compared to one in ten white women. Hispanic women[4] experience postpartum depression at around 12 percent, although rates are significantly higher among certain populations within the identity, and not enough recent data exists to accurately determine inequities within Hispanic populations. All of these rates are likely underestimates because many communities of color experience fear and stigma and do not want to highlight concerns in their medical records out of fear of increased scrutiny, discrimination, and/or jeopardizing their health or their children’s ability to live within the same household.

Pregnant immigrants—both those with and without legal documentation—are impacted by the onslaught of anti-immigrant policies and mass deportations threatening and hurting their communities. People who are pregnant may refuse to visit a health care facility for prenatal care or during labor out of fear of arrest and deportation, which could impact their baby’s health as well as their own physical and mental health. Some immigrant communities are becoming increasingly fearful of the health system, even delaying or avoiding care to deliver their babies, which increases adverse mental health conditions. Coupled with mental health stigma, immigrant parents will not receive the critical mental health care they need during the prenatal and postpartum periods.

In addition to attacks from the executive branch, there are serious legislative threats in the pipeline. House Republicans aim to cut $880 billion from the Medicaid program through the budget reconciliation process. Medicaid funds four in 10 births in the U.S. and is the single largest payer of mental health care services. If these cuts are passed into law, they would have significant impacts on state budgets, putting states at a crossroads to cut key health programs and coverage. Programs providing key clinical outpatient services for pregnant women with low incomes are deeply concerned about these cuts, as Medicaid often provides the funding to pay providers and keep these essential programs alive. Cuts to Medicaid will also likely impact postpartum Medicaid coverage, currently available in 48 states and Washington, D.C..

It is critical for us to understand the links between these policy and funding changes and how they will impact perinatal and postpartum services. We have to let our legislators and policymakers know why these recent administrative and federal legislative directives are deeply concerning. Collectively, we must support and uphold the need for these critical services during the incredibly vulnerable time before and after delivery. Remaining silent means that positive health outcomes for marginalized people will be in jeopardy, and maternal morbidity and mortality rates will rise.

April 11-17, 2025 is Black Maternal Health Week. For more information and resources, please see here.

[1] CLASP recognizes that people of all genders can be pregnant and give birth. Some use the terms “birthing people” and “pregnant people” to capture this. In most cases, we have chosen to use “women” to be consistent with the terminology used in the statistics throughout this piece. 

[2] The Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP) uses the term Indigenous, but for the sake of continuity with national datasets, is noting American Indian and Alaska Native here. 

[3]  CLASP uses the term Asian American, Native Hawaiian, or Pacific Islander, but for the sake of continuity with national datasets, is noting Asian and Pacific Islander here. 

[4] CLASP uses the term Latino, but for the sake of continuity with national datasets, is noting Hispanic here. 

 

This statement can be attributed to Rricha deCant, director of legislative affairs at the Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP)

April 10, 2025, Washington, D.C. – Today, the U.S. House of Representatives approved a budget resolution bill by a vote of 216-214 that was passed by the Senate last week. Its passage highlights the willingness of Congressional leaders to fund tax breaks for the rich and corporations and drive up the deficit through massive Medicaid cuts of $880 billion and SNAP cuts of $230 billion.

The proposal would also slash other public benefit programs that people with low incomes rely on. Instead of passing a budget resolution that would help families grapple with rising costs in an already chaotic economy, Congressional leaders are making it more difficult for families, children, and workers to have access to health care, food, and other essentials.

This measure now opens the door for Congress to write a budget reconciliation bill that could have far-reaching impacts on the lives of millions of Americans for decades to come.

Updated April 2, 2025 by Priya Pandey

Originally published in 2019 by Rebecca Ullrich and updated in February 2022 by Alejandra Londono Gomez

Early childhood programs play an important role in the lives of young children and their families. But in our current political climate, families across the country are questioning whether it’s safe to attend or enroll.

In January 2025, the Trump Administration rescinded the Biden Administration’s guidelines for Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Protection enforcement actions in certain “protected areas.” Immigration enforcement actions had previously been restricted at or near these locations, which include early childhood programs such as licensed child care, preschool, pre-kindergarten, and Head Start programs.

In response, we have updated “A Guide to Creating ‘Safe Space’ Policies for Early Childhood Programs,” which gives practitioners, advocates, and policymakers information and resources to design and implement “safe space” policies that safeguard early childhood programs against immigration enforcement, as well as protect families’ safety and privacy. The guide also includes sample policy text that early childhood providers can adapt for their programs.

Download

This statement can be attributed to Cemeré James, interim executive director of the Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP)

Washington, DC, March 12, 2025—Yesterday, the Trump Administration slashed half of the U.S. Department of Education’s workforce when it laid off approximately 1,300 career staff and 600 probationary employees. A nation’s strength is built on the strength of its public education system, and these actions purposely weaken not only American education but America itself. Mass layoffs also undermine the economy and, if left unchecked, will lead to higher unemployment.

For 46 years, the Department of Education (ED) has helped advance and protect equitable educational opportunities for all students seeking to learn in the United States. The Trump Administration’s “final mission” for the department is to intentionally dismantle it, disregarding both its importance to the nation and the profound unpopularity of shuttering the ED. Allowing Elon Musk and the Department of Government Efficiency to operate the federal government like a private equity firm and unilaterally strip federal agencies of valuable people and resources will be ruinous to students, families, communities, and the economy.

Yesterday’s action is particularly concerning because of the impact on marginalized and vulnerable student populations. Public school systems that rely on federal spending will face increased difficulty in continuing to educate students. With a greatly reduced staff, the ED’s Office of Civil Rights cannot fulfill its obligation to vigilantly enforce federal civil rights laws in schools and among other recipients of ED funding. Researchers will struggle to analyze educational outcomes produced by various federal programs after the elimination of the National Center for Education Studies. Postsecondary students will be unable to begin or continue their educational pathways with the loss of staff capacity to manage financial aid awards. The harm of these cuts to students with disabilities, including the effects on early intervention programs for young children, remains unacknowledged by a Secretary of Education who struggles to remember what IDEA (the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act) stands for.

The administration has no intention of resolving these concerns or communicating how it will replace the ED’s essential services and programs. Since Inauguration Day the administration has wielded authority without regard to the democratic process, ignoring the laws or livelihoods they break.

CLASP stands ready to work with and on behalf of students, families, and communities to advance and protect the educational rights of all students. We call on federal and state policymakers to oppose these reckless actions and take steps to slow down and mitigate the harm while also supporting children, families, and educators at risk. In addition, we call on our partners in the education and children’s advocacy space to join the effort to push back against these harmful attacks, which are an affront to our collective goals to build a more just and equitable country.

 

By Eddie Martin, Jr. 

History has shown us that civil and human rights progress is often met with resistance, and the early days of the second Trump Administration have been no exception. After just six weeks, the nation faces a profound democratic threat, as the administration has put a greater priority on a highly inflammatory agenda than on economic relief for American citizens. Rather than foster unity, this agenda is designed to divide the country—both racially and economically—through direct attacks on diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility (DEIA); civil rights; and equal opportunity. These efforts, enforced through executive orders and policy decisions that lack factual basis, dismantle decades of federal policies that promote equal opportunity. They instill fear, suppress opposition, and sow confusion while masking more insidious efforts to entrench inequality. The consequences are already severe and will continue to worsen, increasing economic injustice and deepening poverty, particularly for people with low incomes and in communities of color. 

For those who remember the harsh realities of segregation, the recent executive orders and the Project 2025 playbook aren’t new. Rather, they are a continuation of a long-standing cycle in which racial and economic justice and civil rights progress for marginalized communities are often met with resistance. For others who have not directly faced systemic oppression, these attacks spark anger, anxiety, and uncertainty, leaving many feeling powerless. However, history teaches us that these moments of backlash must be met with action, not despair. Yet if we are to withstand this onslaught, we must cut through misinformation, respond with strategic resolve, and reaffirm our commitment to equity and inclusion. History must serve as our blueprint for resilience, success, and justice.  

The Interconnectedness of Civil Rights, Racial Equity, and Economic Justice 

The fight for civil rights and racial equity in America has always been inseparable from the fight for economic justice. The Civil Rights Movement (1954-1968) sought not only to dismantle approximately 100 years of Jim Crow segregation and secure voting rights but also to ensure equitable access to health care, housing, education, and employment. Landmark legislation such as the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964 (which established Head Start), the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Executive Order 11246 (which led to the creation of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission), the Voting Rights Act of 1965, and the Fair Housing Act of 1968 laid the foundation for promoting economic justice and opportunity and fighting systemic racism. 

Despite facing violence and threats, civil rights leaders—including Dorothy Height, Medgar Evers, A. Philip Randolph, Thurgood Marshall, Bayard Rustin, Ella Baker, John Lewis, Malcolm X, and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.—led organizations like the National Council of Negro Women, Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee, NAACP, Southern Christian Leadership Conference, Congress of Racial Equality, National Urban League, and Brotherhood of Sleeping Car Porters. Their grassroots organizing and legal victories secured the very protections that today’s DEIA and anti-discrimination initiatives rely upon. 

However, history also warns us that every major civil rights gain has been followed by attempts to roll it back. Just as Nixon’s Southern Strategy and Reagan’s War on Drugs systematically undermined the civil rights advancements of the 1950s and 1960s, the Trump Administration launched attacks on DEIA progress made in recent decades. As civil rights advocate and scholar Kimberlé Crenshaw cautioned, these most recent efforts aim to “come after the entire infrastructure that has been created from the Civil Rights Movement.” 

The Impact of Rolling Back Human and Civil Rights Protections 

The administration’s preemptive policies (past and present) have resulted in: 

These attacks extend beyond the workplace, reaching institutions of higher education and social safety nets. Universities face pressure to end DEIA initiatives under the threat of losing federal funding. Critical programs that provide health care, food, and housing assistance to working-class families and communities of color are at risk of being slashed. Federal troops are being weaponized at the border, while newly appointed civil rights officials are being deployed to target political opponents and to advance reckless economic policies, such as the imposition of tariffs, that threaten to further burden the most vulnerable populations. 

A Call to Action: How We All Stand Together to Fight for Justice 

The administration has consolidated power across all three branches of government, making resistance more challenging but no less necessary. To counteract this systematic injustice and harm, we must adopt a multilateral approach that secures short-term wins while laying the groundwork for long-term strategic and structural change. 

Challenging oppression requires courage, strategy, and often sacrifice. As A. Philip Randolph once said:: 

Justice is never given; it is exacted … and the struggle must be continuous, for freedom is never a final fact, but a continuing evolving process to higher and higher levels of human, social, economic, political and religious relationships. 

To uphold democracy, equity, and justice, we must be creatively maladjusted to injustice, as Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. suggested: fearless in our pursuit of freedom and unrelenting in our demand for equality. The road ahead is difficult, but history has shown us that when we stand together, we prevail. 

By Lulit Shewan

The Southern U.S. has historically had the largest number of Black people in the workforce in the country. This is a region where workplace organizing faces hostile laws and employer power is emboldened. States in the South have some of the lowest rates of union coverage in the country, which means that a sizeable number of Black workers aren’t able to exercise their ability to organize in reprisal of their working conditions.

This issue is both historical and intentional. Low union density in the South is rooted in the ruling class of such states seeking to maintain the longstanding super-exploitation of Black labor following the end of slavery. While chattel slavery bound the enslaved to their masters across all colonies, the South’s agriculture-based economy put a particular premium on free Black labor to build the nation, enforced through extreme violence. This history is inextricably linked to the current state of the South. The same attitudes that harmed both the enslaved and their descendants can be found today in starvation wages, limited economic mobility, poor working conditions, and constrained organizing abilities.

Even as union membership grew in the industrial North, ultimately sparking the Great Migration of Black Southerners in the early- to mid-20th century, Southern powers remained resistant to unionization. Today, only 6 percent of all workers in the region are unionized. That is just one legacy of the region’s resistance; another is legislation that staunchly deters organization and demeans collective bargaining efforts. Such efforts have largely been enforced by the reign of “right-to-work” laws.

All states in the South have right-to-work legislation in effect, meaning that they prohibit union security agreements, which ensure that workers who are not in the union will contribute to the costs of union representation. Proponents of right-to-work laws claim that they protect workers against being forced to join a union, but the largely unspoken and intended effect of such laws are to tilt the balance toward corporations and employers, further rigging the system at the expense of working families.

Arkansas and Florida were the first two states to enact right-to-work laws in the 1940s. Christian Americans, who led the right-to-work campaign in its birthplace of Arkansas, were brazenly racist in their propaganda, warning that if the right to work amendment failed, “white women and white men will be forced into organizations with black African apes… whom they will have to call ‘brother’ or lose their jobs.” It is not coincidental that right-to-work first took root in the Jim Crow South; these laws are just one part of a complex web of calculated efforts to maintain the poverty and exploitation of Black people. The subjugation of the working class and Black communities has always had a place in the region, and those who live at its nexus suffer the most.

While a majority of Americans support unionization, companies continue to push back against organized labor, driving a decline in overall union density and stagnating union growth in the South. The power of these companies is bolstered by anti-worker policymakers aiming to maintain the symbiotic relationship between government and wealth-hoarding corporation entities—a relationship that entirely diminishes the value and self-determination of the Black worker.

Given that the political and legal structures of the South have always been designed to prevent workers from expressing even the most basic forms of power, the collective power built by Black workers within a historically exploited region remains steadfast and inherently undeterred by oppressive administrations and policies. Volkswagen workers in Chattanooga, Tennessee made history in April 2024 when workers voted to unionize with the United Auto Workers (UAW) by a landslide, after tirelessly organizing in one of the states most hostile to unions. Leading up to the vote, anti-worker policymakers such as Governor Bill Lee vehemently spoke out against the UAW’s drive to organize Southern factory workers, in an attempt to dissuade workers from voting. The union won with 73 percent of the vote.

The service sector in the South comprises some of the most challenging workplaces to build labor power, in part due to difficult working conditions and high turnover. This is compounded by employer misinformation about unions and what union organization can offer workers, in support of right-to-work laws.

But the high concentration of Black workers in such industries continues to create a hotbed of collective anger and reprisal, given that this exploitation has history and that racial wage gaps continue to widen as wage inequality grows. In a 2022 study, the Economic Policy Institute found that Black workers have reaped even fewer gains from increased aggregate productivity than white workers. At the forefront of organizing this sector is the newly formed Union of Southern Service Workers (USSW), which found that Black workers make up 41 percent of the employees in South Carolina’s food or beverage, general merchandise, food services, and warehouse and storage jobs, but 27 percent of the state’s workforce. The steadfast organizing drive of the USSW is informed by endless stories of various forms of worker degradation and exploitation.

The Trump Administration wasted no time introducing a slew of anti-union sentiment and legislation. Congressman Joe Wilson (R-SC) reintroduced The National Right to Work Act and Secretary of Labor nominee Lori Chavez-DeRemer walked back support for the PRO Act, which would have overturned Republican-backed right-to-work laws. For many Black workers in the South, these efforts hardly present new threats.

“We are building a union despite the fact that the rules are rigged against us as Southern workers. We are building a union by any means necessary and building it in a way that makes sense for us,” says Eric Winston, service worker and USSW member. Dockworkers, food service employees, and entertainment workers are among the organized groups in the South who have organized strikes in the last year, many reaching tentative agreements. These workers are adapting their organizing to modern workplaces, as with the USSW’s solidarity-centered approach of cross-sector organizing at various locations in different industries.

Organized labor requires investment of time and faces incessant obstacles. Black workers have adopted these undertakings since the Jim Crow South and are at the forefront of the fight against misinformation. For them, it is not a choice, but a necessity. The labor renaissance isn’t over, and the organized U.S. South provides the blueprint for the future.

This statement can be attributed to Cemeré James, interim executive director of the Center for Law and Social Policy (CLASP) 

Washington, D.C., February 26, 2025 – The hollowing out of the federal workforce by the Trump Administration through mass layoffs is an underhanded strategy to dismantle countless programs that support children, families, people with low incomes, communities of color, and other underserved populations. These actions will also deepen the immense harm created by the administration’s elimination of diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility programs—and make it more difficult for families to access the supports they need.

The cuts to jobs across federal agencies—from the Administration for Children and Families and the Department of Education to the Department of Justice and Department of Housing and Urban Development—are said to be done in the name of cost savings and efficiency. But these cuts are causing chaos, disruption, and inefficiencies. They are directly and immediately impacting the lives and families of the employees who have been laid off but also harming children and families across the country. We are only seeing the beginning of the layoffs’ consequences. These cuts are ultimately efforts to limit access to important programs like child care and housing that support people on a path to economic security.

CLASP is concerned that these federal layoffs will decimate the many programs that support people with low incomes and communities of color, ultimately causing negative effects on our nation’s overall economy. While we are already seeing some of the damage, it’s clear that the long-term consequences will be even more significant and could affect generations to come. That’s why we urge everyone who cares about the well-being of individuals and their families, as well as the nation’s economic health, to demand that members of Congress use their authority to stop the decimation of the programs they established and funded.

 

By Alyssa Fortner and Shira Small  

This year’s Black History Month theme, “African Americans and Labor,” provides an important opportunity to uplift and reflect on the ways Black women have shaped America’s child care system. This reflection is particularly critical one month into a new administration that has demonstrated disregard for the contributions of diverse workforces today and throughout history. To change the future of child care, it is important to understand the past, both to acknowledge how injustice shapes the sector and ensure a fairer and more equitable future for those who sustain and utilize the child care system. 

In the time of chattel slavery, enslaved Black women were forced to take care of white children, while not being allowed to take care of their own. In the post-emancipation period, low-paid domestic work was one of the only industries available to Black women. And throughout the 1900s policy choices and both proposed and enacted laws further marginalized and harmed those in the child care workforce and the families that relied on them. CLASP’s more detailed timeline of this history and impact can be found here. 

Though the U.S. child care system has changed over the course of history, the labor of Black women continues to be underpaid and undervalued. While 18 percent of child care workers are Black, Black people only compose 13 percent of the overall U.S. workforce. Despite their overrepresentation in the child care workforce, Black women earn less on average than their white counterparts in a field that is already woefully underpaid, with the average worker earning $30,370 in 2023. For center-based providers, the wage gap between white and Black workers amounts to an average of more than $8,000 per year. Workers in home-based child care programs, which Black providers operate in higher numbers, earn even less.  

On top of low wages, the workforce’s limited access to health insurance, retirement savings, and other benefits demonstrate the continued devaluation of Black women’s labor, harming the entire sector. Creating an economically sustainable profession that supports the well-being of all providers is not only a necessary step in creating a stronger child care system, but in working to repair the history of exploiting Black women’s work.  

Anti-Black racism, discrimination, and a refusal to chart a new path for child care to disconnect it from its unjust roots keeps child care workers underpaid and keeps care unaffordable. At CLASP, we are committed to helping transform the child care system by outlining its history, changing narratives around the system and workforce, and putting forth policy solutions that support those who have been undervalued or overlooked.  

As too many communities in this country face increasing threats to their economic and personal well-being, CLASP remains steadfast in its mission to advance racial and economic equity—especially in moments when progress and justice feel fragile. We are committed to working at the intersection of advancing equity and improving policy, which are inextricably linked. To that end, below are CLASP resources that center racial equity to expand access to child care and support for the child care workforce. These resources seek to understand the impacts of anti-Blackness and racism in the child care sector, because recognizing injustice is the first step in eradicating it. 

Understanding and Improving Equity in ECE Settings 

Centering Black Families: Equitable Discipline through Improved Data Policies in Child Care 

This report documents the history of inequitable disciplinary practices that disproportionately impact Black children in child care and early education and how data can be used to create meaningful solutions that address the harms.   

Standing With Black Communities by Standing Against White Supremacy in Child Care and Early Education Spaces  

This blog discusses ways in which the legacy of white supremacy in the child care sector can be dismantled. 

Child Care Assistance Landscape: Inequities in Federal and State Eligibility and Access 

This report analyzes variations in eligibility and access to Child Care and Development Block Grant subsidies in 2020, disaggregated by race and ethnicity. 

Advancing Equity for the Child Care Workforce  

The Racist History Behind Why Black Childcare Workers Are Underpaid 

This 2022 op-ed examines the history of black labor in the child care sector and how it underpins the workforce’s severe underpayment.   

Expanding Access to Child Care Assistance: Opportunities in the Child Care and Development Fund  

This report and its fact sheets explain how the child care workforce can be better supported and diversified to provide more culturally responsive child care options for families and provides strategies for states to expand access to care.  

Community Engagement as an Anti-Racist Strategy 

Shaping Equitable Early Childhood Policy: Incorporating Inclusive Community Engagement Frameworks into Expanded Data Strategies  

This report examines how community engagement strategies can help create more equitable policies on the road to dismantling systemic racism. 

Parent and Provider Experience Should Inform Child Care Policy 

CLASP partnered with parent leaders from the United Parent Leaders Action Network in this blog to highlight the importance of community engagement as a tool to advance equity, just as it is a tool for creating effective policy. 

By , Danielle Crenshaw

(EXCERPT)

“I feel that kind of the next large struggle for, especially the Black labor force in the country, is in these ongoing discussions around artificial intelligence and how it’ll impact the American workforce at large,” said Christian Collins, a policy analyst at The Center for Law and Social Policy.

Read the full article here