A Republican bill with no cosponsors
Last activity — Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 507.
Cleared committee, waiting for its first floor vote
A committee approved it and it is on the calendar of the chamber it started in.
This is further than most bills get, and still no promise of a vote: the calendar is a queue, and the majority leadership decides what is called. A bill can sit here until the Congress ends.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- On Calendar
What this bill would do
The CRACKDOWN Act of 2026 amends the Child Care and Development Block Grant Act of 1990. It establishes a 5 percent improper payment threshold for States. If a State exceeds this rate, it must submit a corrective action plan for Secretary approval. States that exceed this rate for two consecutive years may become ineligible for funds. To regain eligibility, the State must show it will reduce the rate or make significant progress on its plan.
Yes· 3 of 5
- Scored +4
Does this make the government pay for what it commits to?
Implements stricter oversight and corrective action plans for improper federal spending.
- Scored +3
Does this give the federal government more power?
Increases the Secretary's power to approve corrective plans and determine state eligibility.
- Scored +2
Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see?
Requires reporting and corrective action plans for improper payments.
The opposite· 3 of 13
- Scored -5
Would households on low incomes be better off under this?
Low-income families are most dependent on the Child Care and Development Block Grant.
- Scored -4
Would women be better off under this?
Women are disproportionately affected by the loss of accessible and affordable child care.
- Scored -4
Does this make child care cost less?
Risk of losing childcare funds for families if states fail to meet improper payment thresholds.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
- Reduction of Waste: By requiring a corrective action plan when improper payments exceed 5 percent, the bill aims to reduce waste in the Child Care and Development Block Grant program (Section 2(c)).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Loss of Funding: States that exceed the 5 percent improper payment rate for two consecutive years could become ineligible to receive funds under this subchapter (Section 2(d)). This could result in a loss of child care funding for the people in those States.
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 are most dependent on the Child Care and Development Block Grant. Would women be better off under this? — Women are disproportionately affected by the loss of accessible and affordable child care. Would children be better off under this? — Risk of reduced child care services if states lose funding eligibility. Would Black Americans be better off under this? — Disproportionate impact if funding is cut in states with high populations of minority families relying on the grant. Would Asian Americans be better off under this? — Disproportionate impact if funding is cut in states with high populations of minority families relying on the grant. Would Hispanic Americans be better off under this? — Disproportionate impact if funding is cut in states with high populations of minority families relying on the grant. Would people in middle age be better off under this? — Parents may face loss of child care subsidies if state funding is cut. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — Potential loss of childcare support for eligible middle-class families. Would Native Americans be better off under this? — Disproportionate impact if funding is cut in states with high populations of minority families relying on the grant. Would white Americans be better off under this? — General potential for loss of child care funding in non-compliant states.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this make the government pay for what it commits to? — Implements stricter oversight and corrective action plans for improper federal spending. Does this reduce what the federal government spends? — Attempts to curb waste through strict payment thresholds. Does this reduce what the federal government owes? — Aims to reduce waste and improper payments in federal block grants.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this make child care cost less? — Risk of losing childcare funds for families if states fail to meet improper payment thresholds. Is this likely to lift people out of poverty? — Potential loss of childcare funding could negatively impact low-income families.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this give the federal government more power? — Increases the Secretary's power to approve corrective plans and determine state eligibility. Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — Requires reporting and corrective action plans for improper payments. Does this leave more decisions to the states? — Imposes strict federal thresholds and potential funding penalties on state administration.
- 4/6/2026
- Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Education and Workforce. H. Rept. 119-587.
- Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 507.
- 3/5/2026
- Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
- Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 19 - 15.
- 2/26/2026
- Referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce.
- Introduced in House