The following post is my personal, un-endorsed opinion:
Now, of course, I am all for increasing (and advertising) tax credits for low-income women!, but as an enraptured member of the audience when this was announced, I have to admit that I was somewhat disappointed by the punchline: he acknowledged that a barrier to women staying in the workforce is the lack of affordable childcare. I naturally expected him to announce an increase in funding for subsidized childcare, or even an ad-campaign to help qualified women learn where to go to get it. But, the big news, which warranted an appearance by the model Iman, was an ad campaign for a $1733 (total!) tax credit that is estimated to aid less than 50, 000 families (the income limit is $30, 000 and the children have to be under 4).
The childcare subsidy's financial eligibility guidelines, on the other hand, serve families earning between $37, 000-$62,000 and allow them to pay substantially reduced copays (as little as $3/wk) for quality, regulated childcare.
Considering that the cost of childcare in NYC can be as much or more as rent (we are talking $800-$1400 per month!), any direct assistance will make a difference. A subsidy is the more effective way to ensure that women can retain employment month-to-month, not a once-a-year tax credit that may or may not get refunded in time to make a difference.
Again, I will take what I can get (as always!), but let's get real here: if the city is serious about targeting services to allow low-income women with children to maintain employment by securing access to childcare, they should put that money into subsidies.
