The July 4 launch of Trump Accounts for eligible American children represents a significant upgrade to the social contract. Like Social Security, the accounts let American families make a real contribution to their children’s futures — an investment account that a child will own and can draw on for college, a first home or a business when they turn 18.
Read more Opinion: The hidden strings of foreign funds to universities must stop
This investment opportunity is worth celebrating, as it gives children and their families a stake not only in their own future, but also in the country’s and in the common good.
But Trump Accounts have a massive blind spot. They mature only when a child turns 18, leaving untouched the critical early years when many families are the most stressed financially. That stress puts a child’s future well-being at risk. In Capita’s surveys of families with children at home, we hear about that stress directly. We’ve found that roughly a quarter of families with children rely on debt, payday loans or cash-advance products just to meet basic needs.
Asked what weighs on them the most, parents say their monthly income, the cost of health care, the cost of housing, the cost of child care, and whether they’ll be able to retire with security and dignity. These are the pressures that make it hard for parents to provide their children with what they need to flourish.
And it’s in the first years of life that the architecture of the brain is built.
As the Harvard Center on the Developing Child has documented, that architecture takes shape early, through the everyday “serve-and-return” interactions between children and the adults who care for them. Chronic, unbuffered stress can disrupt those interactions in ways that are difficult and costly to repair later on. What surrounds us shapes us. And a parent’s capacity to surround a child with loving, stable, nurturing relationships in safe and healthy places depends on the resources a family can reach now, not the ones their child will own in 18 years.
Trump Accounts bet, rightly, that money compounds over time. But the highest-yielding asset in any child’s life is the one that begins to compound far earlier: the developing brain.
The logic that recommends a Trump Account should apply with even greater force to the supports that steady a family while that child’s brain is being built. Instead, those supports are being pulled away in exactly the years they matter most.
Under changes to SNAP (the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program) in last year’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act, roughly a million families with children stand to lose some or all of their food assistance, affecting more than 2 million children, according to the Congressional Budget Office’s estimate, cited by UNICEF USA.
Read more Cigarettes are getting their Hollywood moment, again.
Arizona, the state hit hardest by SNAP cuts, has seen at least 196,000 children lose their family benefits. Food assistance is one of the buffers that keeps early hardship from hardening into the chronic stress that reshapes a developing brain, and it’s being withdrawn from the families least able to absorb the shock.
Families’ access to health care, which parents tell us is among their most significant worries, is similarly vulnerable. The One Big Beautiful Bill Act tightened Medicaid enrollment and work requirements. And separately, the enhanced premium tax credits that made Affordable Care Act coverage affordable lapsed at the end of 2025, and the administration and Congress declined to extend them. KFF estimates that ACA marketplace enrollment could fall by roughly 4.8 million people in 2026.
The problem, as I see it, is that our politics keeps getting families wrong, in two opposite directions. Most parents have no wish to depend on the federal government to meet their basic needs. But there is something incoherent in extending a family one hand — an ownership stake that matures in 18 years — while withdrawing the other — the support that helps them raise that child today.
That incoherence represents a blind spot on both the political right and the left.
The right supports a policy that gives children a share of the future while neglecting what they need in the present. The left focuses on programs that help families today without offering a larger vision for what the late Massachusetts Sen. Edward Kennedy called a “fair prosperity for the many, and not just for the few.”
Families need help now, and in the future. But the deeper task, for both parties, is more imaginative. It is to build the policies — such as renewing the expanded Child Tax Credit and passing the Supporting Newborn Parents Act — that would level the ground beneath families and ease the stress parents carry today — stress that writes itself in their children’s developing brains. Such efforts would open pathways to prosperity for all families.
Joe Waters is the cofounder and CEO of Capita, an independent think tank, and lives in North Carolina.
Read more Summer meteor showers begin to light up nighttime skies