A Republican bill with no cosponsors
Last activity — Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 510.
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 "No Waivers for Fraud Act of 2026" is a bill designed to amend the Child Care and Development Block Grant Act of 1990. Its main goal is to sustain sanctions against States that are noncompliant. It does this by eliminating the authority to waive those sanctions.
Yes
- Scored +3
Does this give the federal government more power?
Increases federal oversight by removing state-level flexibility to waive sanctions.
- Scored +2
Does this make the government pay for what it commits to?
Increases accountability for federal fund usage by preventing the waiver of sanctions for noncompliant states.
- Scored +2
Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see?
Aims to reduce fraud and ensure compliance with federal grant requirements.
The opposite· 3 of 4
- Scored -3
Does this leave more decisions to the states?
Decreases state autonomy by eliminating the authority to waive sanctions.
- Scored -2
Would households on low incomes be better off under this?
Low-income families rely most on Child Care and Development Block Grants, which could be impacted by strict sanctions.
- Scored -2
Does this make child care cost less?
Strictly enforcing sanctions on states could potentially reduce the funding available for childcare programs in noncompliant states.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
- Accountability for States: By amending Section 658I(c) of the Child Care and Development Block Grant Act of 1990 to eliminate the authority to waive sanctions, the bill ensures that noncompliant States remain subject to penalties.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Loss of Waiver Flexibility: Because the bill strikes language in Section 658I(c) that allows for the waiver of sanctions, States no longer have the option to have those sanctions waived.
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 rely most on Child Care and Development Block Grants, which could be impacted by strict sanctions. Would children be better off under this? — Potential risk to childcare funding in noncompliant states may indirectly affect children's access to care.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this make the government pay for what it commits to? — Increases accountability for federal fund usage by preventing the waiver of sanctions for noncompliant states.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this give the federal government more power? — Increases federal oversight by removing state-level flexibility to waive sanctions. Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — Aims to reduce fraud and ensure compliance with federal grant requirements. Does this leave more decisions to the states? — Decreases state autonomy by eliminating the authority to waive sanctions.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this make child care cost less? — Strictly enforcing sanctions on states could potentially reduce the funding available for childcare programs in noncompliant states.
- 4/6/2026
- Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Education and Workforce. H. Rept. 119-590.
- Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 510.
- 3/5/2026
- Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
- Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 20 - 15.
- 2/26/2026
- Referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce.
- Introduced in House