Ro Khanna (D-CA)
To enhance the supply of child care, and for other purposes.
A Democratic bill with 2 Democratic cosponsors · See all 2 cosponsors
Last activity — Referred to the Committee on Education and Workforce, and in addition to the Committees on Ways and Means, Agriculture, Energy and Commerce, and Financial Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
The bill, known as the "Free Child Care for America Act," aims to enhance the supply, affordability, and quality of child care in the United States. It establishes several grant programs and funds targeted at center-based care, home-based care, and facilities improvement. Additionally, the legislation creates a stay-at-home parent support benefit program for eligible families with young children. It also sets up a Family, Friend, and Neighbor (FFN) care program to support informal child care arrangements. The bill provides billions in mandatory appropriations across multiple fiscal years to fund these initiatives.
Yes· 3 of 33
- Scored +9
Would households on low incomes be better off under this?
Low-income families receive substantial fee reductions, zero co-payments in informal care settings, and direct monthly stipends for stay-at-home parents.
- Scored +9
Does this make child care cost less?
The legislation establishes comprehensive grant programs and fee reduction structures to make child care free or significantly more affordable for eligible families.
- Scored +8
Would children be better off under this?
The legislation expands access to safe, high-quality learning environments, improves child care facilities, and provides targeted support for children with special needs.
The opposite
- Scored -6
Does this reduce what the federal government spends?
The legislation authorizes tens of billions of dollars in new mandatory appropriations for child care and parental support programs.
- Scored -5
Does this reduce what the federal government owes?
The bill appropriates substantial mandatory funding across multiple fiscal years for child care grants, facility improvements, and family support benefits, increasing federal spending.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Reduced Child Care Costs for Families: Section 102 and Section 103 establish grant programs to provide fee reductions and operational funding for eligible child care providers, aiming to make child care more affordable for families, particularly those with incomes up to 200 percent of the State median income or $250,000.
-
Financial Support for Stay-at-Home Parents: Section 202 and Section 211 establish a stay-at-home parent support benefit program, providing eligible parents who directly care for their children under age three at home with a monthly benefit of $1,000 per eligible child.
-
Improved Compensation for Child Care Workers: Section 103 requires States to establish or enhance a wage and benefits ladder and provide wage supplements to child care staff to ensure wages meet or exceed area living wages.
-
Support for Informal and Family Caregivers: Section 302 and Section 306 establish the Family, Friend, and Neighbor Care Program, which provides direct payments to verified informal providers and ensures parents using this care have no co-payments.
-
Grants for Facility Improvements: Section 104 establishes the Child Care Facilities Grant Program to support the acquisition, improvement, renovation, and construction of child care facilities to expand access to safe learning environments.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Loss of Stipend Benefits Due to Formal Care Enrollment: Section 201 and Section 210 specify that a stay-at-home parent becomes ineligible for the $1,000 monthly stipend if their child participates in certain child care programs for more than 10 hours a week.
-
Matching Fund Requirements for States: Section 102 requires States to provide matching funds starting in fiscal year 2028 (at least 5 percent) and increasing to at least 10 percent in fiscal years 2030 through 2035, which could place financial burdens on State budgets.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Low-income families receive substantial fee reductions, zero co-payments in informal care settings, and direct monthly stipends for stay-at-home parents. Would children be better off under this? — The legislation expands access to safe, high-quality learning environments, improves child care facilities, and provides targeted support for children with special needs. Would women be better off under this? — Women, who statistically shoulder a larger share of caregiving responsibilities, benefit greatly from subsidized child care, wage ladders in a female-dominated workforce, and stay-at-home parent support. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — Middle-income families with incomes up to 200% of the State median income or $250,000 are eligible for significant child care fee reductions and operational grants. Would people with disabilities be better off under this? — The legislation establishes specialized training, enhanced payment rates, and equipment grants dedicated to serving children with disabilities and special needs. Would people in rural areas be better off under this? — The legislation explicitly targets rural and geographically isolated areas for priority child care funding, facility grants, and specialized outreach. Would union members be better off under this? — The bill explicitly protects and encourages the right of child care workers and family, friend, and neighbor providers to organize and engage in collective bargaining. Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this? — Young adults of childbearing age benefit significantly from reduced child care costs, stay-at-home parent stipends, and expanded care options. Would Black Americans be better off under this? — The bill prioritizes assistance for low-income families and historically underserved communities facing persistent barriers to early childhood services. Would business owners be better off under this? — Child care center owners and licensed family child care providers receive direct operational grants, facility improvement funds, and training support. Would farmers be better off under this? — Rural communities and agricultural areas benefit from targeted provisions and priority grants designed to address geographically isolated child care shortages. Would Hispanic Americans be better off under this? — Multilingual outreach, translation requirements for digital portals, and prioritization of priority populations expand access for Hispanic families and providers. Would Native Americans be better off under this? — The legislation includes dedicated funding reservations and administrative accommodations specifically tailored for Tribal organizations and Native communities. Would people in middle age be better off under this? — Middle-aged individuals who are parents of young children or working as child care professionals benefit from financial assistance and wage ladders. Would students be better off under this? — Student parents pursuing higher education benefit from subsidized child care options that enable them to continue their studies. Would people in cities be better off under this? — Urban residents benefit from the broad expansion of child care facility grants, innovation funds, and community-based support networks in cities. Would veterans be better off under this, taking everything together? — Veterans and military families with young children benefit from expanded child care availability, affordability, and supportive grant programs.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this make child care cost less? — The legislation establishes comprehensive grant programs and fee reduction structures to make child care free or significantly more affordable for eligible families. Does this narrow the gap between how men and women are treated? — By addressing the unaffordability of child care and supporting both working parents and stay-at-home parents, the bill alleviates caregiving burdens that disproportionately impact women. Is this likely to lift people out of poverty? — Providing monthly financial stipends to low-income stay-at-home parents and eliminating child care co-payments directly aids low-income households and reduces poverty. Does this expand the rights of people with disabilities? — The bill mandates targeted support, specialized training, and equipment grants for child care providers serving children with disabilities and special needs.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — The bill mandates extensive reporting, public evaluations, advisory boards, and public data dissemination regarding program effectiveness and fund allocation. Does this leave more decisions to the states? — The bill heavily involves state lead agencies in administering subgrants, developing wage ladders, conducting zoning reviews, and tailoring programs to local needs. Does this give the federal government more power? — The legislation creates extensive new federal grant programs, national administrative boards, and regulatory standards administered through federal agencies.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this make it easier to run a small business? — The bill provides direct operational grants, training funds, and facility improvement grants to support small family-based and center-based child care providers. Is this likely to create jobs? — The bill creates extensive grant programs and funding structures to expand child care supply, facilities, and caregiver support, driving job creation in the early childhood sector. Is this likely to grow the economy? — By substantially lowering child care costs and providing support for working parents and stay-at-home parents, the bill facilitates greater labor force participation and economic activity. Does this strengthen the rights of workers to organise? — The legislation establishes explicit labor protections, rights to organize, and collective bargaining frameworks for child care workers and family, friend, and neighbor providers. Does this reduce what the federal government spends? — The legislation authorizes tens of billions of dollars in new mandatory appropriations for child care and parental support programs. Does this reduce what the federal government owes? — The bill appropriates substantial mandatory funding across multiple fiscal years for child care grants, facility improvements, and family support benefits, increasing federal spending.
- Education And Technology
- Does this put more money into public schools? — The bill provides substantial supplemental mandatory funding for Head Start programs alongside major investments in early childhood education. Does this make college cost less? — The bill partners with institutions of higher education, particularly community colleges, to provide training, certificates, and degree programs for child care providers. Does this get reliable internet to more people? — The establishment of digital platforms such as the Kin Care Interface and online portals encourages expanded digital connectivity and mobile application usage for families and providers.
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Does this invest in rural communities? — The legislation specifically prioritizes child care facility grants and support initiatives for rural and geographically isolated areas.
- Healthcare
- Does this make health care easier to get in general? — The legislation provides specialized grants, resources, and enhanced payment rates for child care providers serving children with disabilities and special health care needs.
- 10/5/2026
- Referred to the Committee on Education and Workforce, and in addition to the Committees on Ways and Means, Agriculture, Energy and Commerce, and Financial Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in House
Jasmine CrockettDemocrat · Texas
Eleanor NortonDemocrat · District of Columbia