President Joe Biden signed the Inflation Reduction Act Tuesday at the White House — a $740 billion package that took nearly a year to get through Congress. 

While it lowers health care costs, includes new tax measures and offers clean energy incentives, it left out many of the signature priorities in Biden’s original Build Back Better plan, such as universal pre-K, lowering child care costs and extending a pandemic-era child tax credit.

Early-childhood education advocates in recent weeks have harshly criticized Congress for leaving programs for young children out of the bill.

“It is a complete shame that the Senate’s Inflation Reduction Act does not include inflation-fighting funding for child care,” Michelle Kang, CEO of the National Association for the Education of Young Children, said in a statement last month.

A year ago, Miriam Calderón was leading the U.S. Department of Education’s work in early-childhood, a time when $400 billion in new federal funding for programs serving young children still seemed within reach.

Now she’s working on the outside, hoping Congress passes a bill with a small fraction of that amount.

While the Senate once again inches closer to voting on what was originally President Joe Biden’s Build Back Better plan, the recent compromise won’t include the $390 billion for child care and preschool and $190 billion for a child tax credit that the last November. Biden campaigned on adding four more years to public education — two in preschool and two for free community college. So far, he’s had to back off both promises. 

“There’s no sugar-coating it — it feels like a gut punch,” said Calderón, now chief policy officer at Zero to Three, an advocacy organization. “We will not have anything more equitable for children, birth to 5, without greater federal investment.”

House Democrats passed the $2 trillion package last November with the expectation that Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York would secure enough votes to get it to President Joe Biden’s desk. But fiscally conservative Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin, whose vote is necessary in the 50-50 divided Senate, has only agreed to a smaller to lower health care costs, address inflation and reduce carbon emissions. For now, Biden’s pledge to pay for two years of free preschool and shrink families’ child care costs is out of the conversation.

For many in the early-childhood field, the omission is a rejection by Democrats at a time when programs are still trying from staff shortages and sharp declines in enrollment wrought by the pandemic.

“When it comes to making commitments in the federal budget towards evidence-based early childhood policies, we have fallen short as a nation,” Rasheed Malik, senior director of early childhood policy at the left-leaning Center for American Progress, said last month at a House budget committee hearing on early-childhood funding. 

Republican members at the hearing panned Biden’s original proposal, saying it doesn’t prioritize “nuclear families” and includes large tax increases. Rep. Jason Smith of Missouri dismissed it as “build back broke.”

But even a from Sens. Patty Murray of Washington and Tim Kaine of Virginia — with $18 billion for preschool and $72 billion for child care — would have been “the largest federal investment in pre-K ever,” said Steven Barnett, senior co-director of the National Institute for Early Education Research. Total current state spending on pre-K is less than $10 billion, he added.

Julie Kashen, a senior fellow at The Century Foundation, a progressive think tank, said there’s still a slim chance Manchin, who weeks ago had ruled out an agreement on climate policy, would have another change of heart. During the vote, senators will also be able to offer amendments.

“We started out at $400 billion and we are far from there,” she said. “But until the ink is dry, we keep seeing things change. They could change again.”

For now, states and advocates are moving ahead on their own without a huge federal windfall.

“We know what it looks like when [the funding] doesn’t come through. That is our history,” said Kashen, who has worked on federal child care and family support policy for more than two decades. 

In New Mexico, residents will vote this November on a that would guarantee children a right to an education — not just K-12 students, but those 5 and under as well. If the measure passes, the state would put $125 million a year toward early-childhood education, generated from fees on public lands.

In the meantime, officials are state and federal relief funds to make child care free for every family for the next year. 

New Jersey has also to upgrade preschool facilities, expand access to child care and pre-K, and support home-visiting programs, which often target low-income mothers with newborns and toddlers. Barnett said the state is wise to put relief funds primarily toward construction projects, “which will pay off for the next 30 years or more” instead of “giving one-time bonuses and other things that are transitory.” 

Some states are also using relief funds for early-childhood staff raises, to support teacher mental health and pay for training, according to a National Association of State Boards of Education issued Tuesday. 

Romney’s family plan

While Manchin has said he supports , he argued against raising taxes to pay for Biden’s proposals during a period of high inflation. And he vowed only to support the child tax credit, which provided up to $300 per month for families with young children, if it included a work requirement for parents. show the direct payments helped families afford rent, groceries and school supplies last year. 

Conservatives are now backing a similar proposal from Republican Sen. Mitt Romney of Utah, His would provide most families with $350 per month for children from birth to age 5 and $250 for school-age children. 

Michael Petrilli, president of the right-leaning Thomas B. Fordham Institute, said educators should support the bill, saying it “has the potential to help millions of kids — especially poor and working-class children — come to school ready to learn.”

Sen. Michael Bennet, a Colorado Democrat who has pushed to make the Biden child tax credit permanent, tweeted that he Romney’s work on the issue. But Bennet’s staff said he splits with the Republican on details. Romney’s plan would require families to earn $10,000 in the previous year to qualify for the credit and cut for low-income families to pay for the credit.

Bennet, along with other Senate Democrats, such as Sherrod Brown of Ohio and Cory Booker of New Jersey, hope they can squeeze into an end-of-the-year tax package.

Meanwhile,some Democrats are still pushing to include last-minute funding for young children in the final deal between Manchin and Schumer — now called the Inflation Reduction Act — before the Senate is expected to break for recess next week. 

“The simple reality is that if we don’t act now, the child care crisis will only get worse,” Murray said in a statement Thursday. “As we fight inflation, we must help parents find and afford the child care they need so they can get back to work, and help child care providers stay in business.”

In his , Biden promised to “keep fighting” for lower preschool and child care costs.

“This bill is far from perfect. It’s a compromise,” he said. “But it’s often how progress is made: by compromises.”

The House passed President Joe Biden’s Build Back Better plan Friday morning by a 220 to 213 vote. One Democrat, Jared Golden of Maine, voted against it.

The $1.75 trillion package — which Democrats say creates a vital social safety net for American families but Republicans call a reckless spending spree during a period of inflation — now heads to the Senate, where its future remains uncertain. The legislation would fund universal pre-K, child care and K-12 educator preparation programs over a 10-year period.

“The impact of this proposal on educational equity, excellence and opportunity â€” from cradle to college and career — will be nothing short of transformative,” U.S. Secretary of Education Miguel Cardona said in a statement.

On Thursday, the Congressional Budget Office released its  of the bill, showing the programs would increase the deficit by $367 billion over the 10-year period, a figure that doesn’t include additional revenue from tax enforcement. 

The House is expected to vote next week on President Joe Biden’s $1.75 trillion social spending plan, but its future in the Senate remains uncertain with some progressives wanting to add more programs to the package and two budget-minded Democrats likely to oppose those efforts.

For now, however, Democrats are celebrating the passage of half of Biden’s legislative agenda — the $1.2 trillion infrastructure bill that includes funds to expand broadband access, replace diesel school buses and rid schools of lead pipes.

Some of those efforts are well-timed. Just last week, a released from the National Association of State Boards of Education showed that while 45 states have voluntary or mandatory lead testing programs for schools, only 15 provide any financial support for mitigation.

“The influx of money would help bolster state and local efforts for lead testing in schools and provide more opportunities for states to engage in the work,” said Renee Rybak Lang, spokeswoman for the association.

States, she said, will need “clear guidance” on how schools and districts can apply for the funds — $15 billion for replacing lead pipes and $23.5 billion for water treatment projects, fixing pipes and other work to provide clean drinking water.

Families and educators, however, have been more invested in whether the social spending plan — which includes funds for universal pre-K, child care, tax credits and educator preparation programs — makes it to Biden’s desk. For three months, progressive Democrats in the House delayed a vote on the infrastructure bill, arguing they wanted to pass both parts of Biden’s agenda at the same time. But it didn’t work out that way. While they passed the infrastructure bill Friday night, and Biden said he will , the House was only able to pass a rule setting up a future vote for the so-called “Build Back Better” plan. Moderates aren’t ready to sign off on it until they can ensure cost estimates from the Congressional Budget Office square with what the president has told them about its impact on the deficit.

To advance the bill, Democrats are using a process known as reconciliation, which requires only a simple majority to pass. But some observers suggest it could be well into the holiday season before a vote is scheduled in the Senate. And if changes are made, it would have to go back to the House for approval.

“I do have faith that when we get it out of the House, it will pass in the Senate,” said Julie Kashen, a senior fellow at The Century Foundation, a left-leaning think tank. “What’s driving me right now is a lot of hope and the knowledge that there are tons of constituents in West Virginia and Arizona who will benefit from what’s in there.”

Those are the home states of Sens. Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema, the two fiscally conservative Democrats who drove the cost of the package down from its original $3.5 trillion price tag. 

To reach that deal, the White House agreed to extend a higher child tax credit for one year instead of four, eliminated the president’s plan for free community college and took out over $80 billion for school construction. Nonetheless, Manchin, of West Virginia, has said he still for the $1.75 trillion plan, regardless of what the Congressional Budget Office concludes.

‘Not the first time’

Losing funds for building and renovating schools has been the biggest disappointment for K-12 leaders, who say it’s not just lead pipes but also mold, asbestos, leaky roofs, and inadequate heating and air-conditioning systems that threaten the health and safety of students. 

“Members of Congress cannot keep punting on funding the second largest infrastructure sector in the country and claim they want global competitiveness, high-quality educators and equitable academic outcomes for students of color,” AASA, the School Superintendents Association, said in a strongly worded statement when the $1.75 trillion agreement was announced. 

The association is asking the U.S. Department of Education to give districts more time to spend relief funds from the American Rescue Plan, which provided $122 billion for K-12, on facility needs. According to the organization’s September , a quarter of respondents said the 2024 deadline to spend the money is an obstacle because contractors are hesitant to work under that timeline as long as supply chain disruption is driving up costs and making it hard to get materials.

A spokesman for AASA said the organization has not received a response. But in a statement, the department emphasized the American Rescue Plan’s “historic and unprecedented investment in education” and said it would “continue to work with state and local education communities” to provide support, but did not say whether it would extend the deadline.

Nation ‘not partisan’ on pre-K 

While public schools won’t see more federal funds for construction anytime soon, states would potentially have up to $50 billion over the next three years for in the child care sector — including expanding and renovating facilities. Child care centers are among the settings that would accommodate new universal pre-K classrooms.

The combined $400 billion for child care and pre-K in the social spending bill would lower or eliminate the cost of care and preschool for many families. But experts say it’s still hard to predict if states that have never offered public pre-K — such as Idaho, New Hampshire, South Dakota and Wyoming — would participate.

“They don’t think they need it,” Steve Barnett, senior co-director of the National Institute for Early Education Research, said about those states. While the bill would allow locally funded programs to participate, Barnett added that governors would “have to decide whether they would rather be in control or turn it down and have localities go their own way.”

When pressed recently on whether he supports universal pre-K, Wyoming Republican said he thinks Biden’s policies aren’t helping people. 

But Kashen of the Century Foundation noted that many Republican governors were early supporters of state-funded pre-K. While the bill in Washington is partisan, she said, “the nation is not partisan on this issue.”

The House will resume consideration of the $1.2 infrastructure bill Friday morning after Thursday night slipped away without a vote. 

Negotiations that would secure moderate Democrats’ support of President Joe Biden’s separate social spending bill — the deal that progressives are waiting for in order to vote for the infrastructure package — are continuing.

 â€œA great deal of progress has been made this week, and we are closer to an agreement than ever,” White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki said in a statement. â€œBut we are not there yet, and so, we will need some additional time to finish the work, starting tomorrow morning first thing.” 

Meanwhile Biden signed a continuing resolution Thursday night, avoiding a government shutdown and giving the Senate until Dec. 3 to work on the fiscal year 2022 budget. The president’s proposed budget includes significant increases for Title I, special education and community schools.

“There’s so much more to do,” the president said in a statement. “But the passage of this bill reminds us that bipartisan work is possible and it gives us time to pass longer-term funding to keep our government running and delivering for the American people.”

Democrats, however, wanted to include language that would lift the debt ceiling, which the government will hit Oct. 18. Republicans voted against that plan.

With Congress tackling overlapping budget issues this week, advocates are most focused on saving President Joe Biden’s bold agenda for schools and families.

The proposed $3.5 trillion “Build Back Better” plan, which would lower costs that are “squeezing families month after month and year after year,” includes major increases for early-childhood education, teacher and principal preparation, school construction and community college. But Democrats don’t have enough support to pass it, even though they’re using a process known as reconciliation, which doesn’t require a single Republican vote.

Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for ĂŰĚŇÓ°ĘÓ Newsletter

Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia, who along with fellow Democrat Krysten Sinema of Arizona to such sweeping legislation, made it clear in a statement Wednesday night that he can’t be convinced otherwise.

“Since the beginning of this reconciliation debate, I have been consistent in my belief that any expansion of social programs must be targeted to those in need, not expanded beyond what is fiscally possible,” Manchin . “While I am hopeful that common ground can be found that would result in another historic investment in our nation, I cannot — and will not — support trillions in spending or an all or nothing approach that ignores the brutal fiscal reality our nation faces.”

The debate over the president’s agenda has revealed sharp divides among Democrats, while Republicans have held a united front against compromise proposals. Disagreement among Democrats is most obvious over the $1.2 trillion infrastructure package, which House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was weighing whether to bring to a vote Thursday. Moderates have demanded a vote on the funding for roads, bridges and broadband, while progressives have said they won’t support the infrastructure bill unless they first get a vote on the larger reconciliation bill.

It’s not the infrastructure bill THEN maybe the Build Back Better package down the road. That wasn’t the deal.

Progressives won’t back down. We’re fighting the people’s fight and we’re going to deliver the entire Build Back Better agenda.

— Pramila Jayapal (@PramilaJayapal)

Adding to the tension, Congress will try to avert a government shutdown Thursday by passing a continuing resolution that keeps the government open past the end of the fiscal year. Democrats are also faced with meeting an Oct. 18 deadline to keep the U.S. from defaulting on its loans.

The House on Wednesday passed, along party lines, a bill to raise the government’s $28 trillion debt limit — the total amount the government can borrow to cover its obligations. But the bill is not expected to pass in the Senate. Defaulting can lead to , hinder and make it much harder to cover the costs of the reconciliation bill if it passes.

Democrats argue that the Trump administration was partially responsible for the increase in spending, so Republicans should bear some of the responsibility for raising the limit. But Republicans have said as long as Democrats control Congress and the White House, they can add it to their reconciliation bill.

The ongoing stalemate has some wondering whether the bill will survive.

“You’ve got to figure there’s now a chance, very small but real, that the bill stalls out,” Rick Hess, a senior fellow at the conservative American Enterprise Institute, said about the proposed $3.5 trillion package.

Dropping the total price tag, perhaps as low as , could “set off some brutal intramural battles among the [Democrats],” Hess said, and would “certainly offer a stress test of various Democratic priorities.”

Mary Filardo, executive director of the 21st Century School Fund, which advocates for modernizing schools, is among those lobbying to keep their priorities in the final package. She’s been meeting with Senate staff members about the $82 billion slated for school construction and repairs.

“They seem pretty subdued, like they don’t really know what is going on,” she said, adding that they “support the issue, but it doesn’t seem to be a must have.”

Cutting school construction funding, she said, could impact another key priority in the package — universal preschool. While Biden’s $200 billion plan would put some classrooms in community-based centers, schools would also need to accommodate more pre-K students.

‘Could still be effective’ 

Some observers suggested there’s room to negotiate amounts over the big-ticket provisions, such as pre-K, child care and free community college.

“All of these could still be effective even if the top line numbers go down,” said Julia Martin, legislative director at Brustein and Manasevit, a law firm specializing in education.

But Shantel Meek, a professor at Arizona State University and director of the Children’s Equity Project, said she hopes lawmakers don’t trim the preschool proposal by “pitting access and quality against one another. In order for [universal pre-K] to meet the promise we know it can, we need access to quality — that means supporting the whole child, whole family.”

Others are concerned whether some of the smaller provisions would get cut from the package, such as the $4 billion to continue the Emergency Connectivity Fund, which addresses the digital divide for students learning at home.

“We want to make sure the connectivity [and] devices provided … aren’t in a position to go dark and disconnect students,” said Noelle Ellerson Ng, associate executive director for advocacy and governance at AASA, The School Superintendents Association.

Originally part of the American Rescue Plan, the $7 billion program allows school districts to purchase devices for students and cover the cost of at-home internet service. According to the , more than $1.2 billion in funds have been awarded so far to 3,040 schools, 260 libraries and 24 organizations that include both. A second application window runs through Oct. 13.

Even if all of the education-related proposals stay in the package, Martin warned that one way negotiators could lower the final figure is to increase states’ share of the cost. The for example, currently calls for the federal government to pick up 100 percent of the cost of serving all 3- and 4-year-olds for the first two years, with states contributing increasing percentages of the cost over time.

“My concern would be if the state matches were to go up,” Martin said. “I think that would result in a patchwork implementation at best, and may make it more difficult for states to access funds.”

Linda Smith, director of the Bipartisan Policy Institute’s Early Childhood Development Initiative, said another option would be to limit the number of years covered by the legislation or to limit the program to children with greater needs. But she said that would be hard to do after the president pledged it would be universal.

Nonetheless, she remains hopeful that the early-childhood proposals would remain a centerpiece of the final plan.

“It always gets a little crazy when the sausage-making gets into high gear,” she said. “I still think something will come out of this.”