Yes, in fact, part of my presentation was to mention the statistic you asked about initially, and for some reason I had forgotten.
In fact, yes, the serious issue here is that female-headed lone-parent families account for a very disproportionate share of all children with families. Currently, 43% of all children classified as living in a low-income family live in a female-headed lone-parent family, whereas these families account for only about 13% of all children. So obviously there's a disproportionate share there.
In terms of the day care and that part of the question, we didn't tie the two together. In fact, we didn't do a whole lot of research into the low-income statistics for female lone parents, but I did some work on this in the past. We actually did a full publication on female lone parents a few years back. The data are a little old now, but as I recall it, there was a strong correlation between the incidence of low income in these families and the non-presence of an earner. So in a female lone-parent family, if there is no earner, it's almost assured that 95% or 96% of those families will have low incomes.
In fact, if you took our two charts on female lone parents, the percentage who have low incomes...and if you inverted the one with employment rates, what you'll see is that they track very closely. Whether that's a real statistical conclusion or not...but certainly having someone who is employed in that family has a very strong correlation to the incidence of low income.
Now, we didn't then take it to the next step and ask, well, why are the 35% of female lone parents who are not employed not employed? That's certainly one of the questions that comes out of this.
Is the lack of child care a factor? It could be, but at this point in time we certainly don't know. Certainly the issue of these families and employment is absolutely key to the relationship with low income, no question about it.