The incoming Trump administration’s campaign promises to make having kids more affordable, such as by bolstering the child tax credit, will likely face stiff challenges amidst a forthcoming tax battle, including from fellow Republicans. 

Despite the GOP’s “trifecta” of control over the House, Senate and White House heading into the new term, intra-party concerns over government spending, a reshuffling of congressional leadership, and opposition from Democrat opponents are all factors that could limit the new administration’s ability to put robust “pro-family” policies into practice.  

“There will be a lot of dynamics to keep an eye on,” said Joseph Zeballos-Roig, a congressional reporter, on a Nov. 19 webinar on the future of pro-family policy hosted by the Ethics and Public Policy Center (EPPC).  

The uncertain path forward comes at a moment when the pro-life movement and other socially conservative activists have increasingly embraced a more proactive government role in making having and raising kids more affordable, a shift that has been recently featured in publications such as The New Yorker. 

The shift is captured in some of the policy views of the incoming vice president, JD Vance, a Catholic convert and current U.S. senator from Ohio. Bucking conventional GOP rhetoric around limited government, Vance has frequently spoken in favor of enhancing federal assistance and incentives for families and even proposed boosting the child tax credit (CTC) by 150%, from $2,000 per child to $5,000, while campaigning in August.  

Other pro-life advocacy groups have taken to promoting policy proposals like exempting mothers of four or more kids from paying income taxes or making birth free. Some Catholics contend that these measures are consistent with Church teaching on the need for society to actively support families, especially at a time of record-low fertility rates.  

 

Pro-Family Challenges 

Although pro-family conservatives have rhetorical and electoral momentum behind them, the movement will still have to contend with a GOP establishment that includes budget hawks and fiscal libertarians, a tension that will be drawn out in a forthcoming tax battle expected to dominate the 2025 congressional session. 

For instance, in this climate, the $3.6-trillion price tag associated with Vance’s proposed CTC boost makes it “probably outside of the realm of possibility,” said EPPC fellow Patrick Brown on the recent webinar.  

In fact, it’s still an open question if the new GOP-led Congress will even prioritize keeping the current $2,000 level of the CTC. The level was increased from $1,000 in 2017 via the Trump-era Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, but the tax package is set to expire in 2025.  

With a climbing deficit, some lawmakers may be hesitant to continue to allow the more robust credit to continue, or to prioritize tax breaks for families over businesses. 

“I think Republicans will be in for an enormous fight within their own party on what provisions to prioritize,” said Zeballos-Roig. 

Citing the potential cut to the current CTC if the Congress fails to renew the 2017 credit, Leah Libresco Sargeant said that “there has to be momentum” to do something. 

“We know there needs to be reform of the CTC,” said the Catholic author and policy analyst. “The question is: What form will it take?” 

 

Policy Opportunities  

Despite the unlikelihood of a major boost coming to the CTC, speakers at the EPPC event highlighted other, more feasible pro-family policy tweaks. 

For instance, the CTC could be tied to changes in the cost of raising a child, a proposal previously floated by U.S. Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa. 

Citing her own personal experience as a mother, Sargeant would welcome the adjustment. 

“I’ve seen my CTC whittled away, year by year,” said Sargeant, a fellow at the Niskanen Center think tank, noting that the $2,000 credit approved in 2017 would actually be worth more than $2,500 today if its value had kept up with inflation. 

Sargeant also said Congress should commit to a “baby bonus” of $2,000, a one-per-kid subsidy that would be distributed before or at birth to help offset costs associated with having a newborn. 

“It meets parents at that moment when they need the most,” she said, adding that baby bonuses are not “welfare dependency-inducing” and also address financial concerns associated with having a child, one of the most commonly cited reasons by women who choose abortion. 

Autumn Christensen, vice president of public policy for Susan B. Anthony List, a pro-life organization, similarly advocated for government intervention to make motherhood more fiscally attainable, noting that 75% of abortions are sought by women living at 200% of poverty and under. 

Additionally, Christensen argued that the Trump administration “has a tremendous opportunity” to enhance the impact of already existing programs, including by tasking government agencies to proactively connect at-risk women with housing, transportation and addiction resources, including from faith communities. 

“We want to lift up those kinds of programs and look forward to an administration that can help do that,” she said. 

 

Congressional Factors 

In terms of how the GOP decides to prioritize (or not) pro-family policy, key figures to watch include U.S. Sen. Mike Crapo of Idaho, who has said that tax cuts don’t need to be financed with offsetting savings, as well as the more fiscally libertarian chair of the House Committee on Ways and Means, U.S. Rep. Jason Smith of Missouri.  

And given that the GOP enjoys only narrow margins in both the House and Senate, “anybody can play the role of Manchin,” said Zeballos-Roig, referring to the moderate former Democratic senator from West Virginia who frequently frustrated his party by opting out of legislation over concerns about cost. 

Additionally, the impending departure from Capitol Hill of pro-family-policy champions like Vance and U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida, Trump’s pick to be secretary of state, leaves the movement’s legislative strategy somewhat murky. 

However, U.S. Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri is expected to retain his influence on the Hill, while John Shelton, policy director of the conservative advocacy group Advancing American Freedom, suggested that Vance’s role in the incoming administration could give the pro-family side even more negotiating power if Trump chooses to prioritize it. 

The reality, however, is that with control of the government, Republicans face enormous pressure to pass a tax bill that avoids both significant costs and driving up the tax burden on American families. Democrats are likely to use a failure on either account for political gain. 

“The GOP is in full control,” said Zeballos-Roig. “If they fail, they’ll only have themselves to blame.”