Fact Sheet: Parents Support a Positive Child and Family Agenda
Children on the Ballot
By a more than 5-to-1 margin, parents believe the federal government is spending too little on children (63% too little to 12% too much). That gap rises to 66-9% among mothers.
When it comes to more specific policies, the percentage of those who believe the federal government is spending too little often rises. For example, the margin rises to 13-to-1 when it comes to reducing child hunger (65-5% overall and mothers at a near-unanimous 68-1%).
Parents also believe the federal government is spending too little rather than too much when it comes to reducing child poverty (67-16%), reducing child homelessness (69-13%), and reducing child abuse and neglect (67-10% overall and 76-6% among mothers).
On other issues, such as early childhood education (63-9% overall and 67-8% among mothers), assistance for childcare expenses (61-11% overall and 70-8% among mothers), providing affordable health insurance coverage (52-12%), accessing mental health services (64-14%), and preventing gun violence (52-20%), parents believe the federal government is spending too little rather than too much on children.
With respect to public education, parents believe we are spending too little rather than too much by a 60-19% margin.
In sharp contrast, the “parent rights” movement advocated by groups like Moms for Liberty seeks to exclude engagement with government under the mantra “we don’t co-parent” in all decision-making. This movement calls upon parents to govern and direct all matters involving their children and includes an agenda to privatize public schools, impose speech codes upon teachers, whitewash history and science curriculum, and ban books from public school libraries.
This agenda, particularly the banning of books, are unpopular with the American people. For example, a February 2022 CBS News/YouGov poll showed that voters opposed banning books for “criticizing U.S. history” (17% yes, 83% no), “political ideas you disagree with” (15-85%), “depicting slavery” (13-87%), and “discussing race” (13-87%).
These numbers highlight strong interest in a “Child and Family Agenda” that is inclusive of the role of the government in providing key supports and functions to parents for our children rather than the government enforcing censorship and limits on free speech in response to the so-called “rights” of certain parents.
If, in fact, the government is failing, it is in providing “too little” support to children and families and not because it chooses not to censor teachers and ban books and free speech.