A Republican bill with 6 Democratic cosponsors · See all 9 cosponsors
Last activity — Referred to the Committee on Education and Workforce, and in addition to the Committee on 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 Child Care Modernization Act of 2026 seeks to amend and reauthorize the Child Care and Development Block Grant Act of 1990. It aims to update the purposes of the Act to include greater state flexibility, parental choice, and support for a qualified child care workforce. The bill updates definitions for eligible activities and children to better reflect modern needs. It also introduces a new part of the Act focused on child care supply and facilities grants. These grants are intended to expand the capacity of providers and improve facilities. Finally, the bill includes technical updates and loan restrictions for the Department of Agriculture.
Yes· 3 of 27
- Scored +8
Does this make child care cost less?
The legislation reauthorizes and updates child care block grants, establishes cost estimation models for payment rates, and provides grants for supply expansion.
- Scored +7
Would children be better off under this?
The bill improves early learning and development standards and expands the supply of safe, high-quality child care facilities.
- Scored +6
Would households on low incomes be better off under this?
The bill focuses heavily on low-income children and families, expanding access to affordable, subsidized child care options.
The opposite· 3 of 5
- Scored -3
Would high-income households be better off under this?
The inclusion of a $1,000,000 family asset cap restricts certain families from receiving child care assistance regardless of immediate cash flow.
- Scored -3
Would people with substantial wealth be better off under this?
Asset limitations for assistance eligibility negatively impact families holding significant assets above the threshold.
- Scored -3
Would the very wealthiest people be better off under this?
Asset limits on child care assistance eligibility apply restrictions to higher-wealth brackets.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Increased Parental Choice and Flexibility: The bill aims to allow states more flexibility in developing mixed delivery systems, which can help provide child care that best suits the specific needs of working parents in that state (Section 2(b)(1)).
-
Support for Working Parents: The updated definition of "eligible activity" includes job training, education, and health treatment, which can help parents achieve independence from public assistance (Section s 3(a)(4)).
-
Improved Workforce Quality: The Act aims to support the educational and professional development of child care staff, helping to recruit and retain a qualified workforce (Section 2(b)(6)).
-
Enhanced Facility Safety and Capacity: Through the new "Child Care Supply and Facilities" part, providers can receive subgrants to expand their operations or renovate buildings to ensure children are in healthy and safe environments (Section 12, Section 658T(a)).
-
Expanded Access for Specific Groups: The bill includes provisions to assist children experiencing homelessness, children in kinship care, and children in need of protective services (Section 3(a)(4)(5)(C)).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Increased Financial Burdens on States: States are required to certify that payment rates will be sufficient to meet the full cost of providing services, including fixed and operational costs (Section 6, Section 658E(c)(4)(A)).
-
Potential Barriers via Copayments: While the bill requires a sliding fee scale that is not a barrier, the requirement for families to provide a copayment remains a factor in accessing services (Section 6, Section 658E(c)(5)).
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 children be better off under this? — The bill improves early learning and development standards and expands the supply of safe, high-quality child care facilities. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — The bill focuses heavily on low-income children and families, expanding access to affordable, subsidized child care options. Would people in rural areas be better off under this? — The legislation explicitly prioritizes and provides technical assistance for expanding child care supply in rural areas. Would women be better off under this? — Women, who frequently bear primary caregiving responsibilities, benefit significantly from expanded child care accessibility and work-enabling provisions. Would business owners be better off under this? — Child care providers and business owners benefit from facility grants, startup funding, and business technical assistance. Would people in middle age be better off under this? — Middle-aged working parents benefit directly from increased child care options and financial support. Would people with disabilities be better off under this? — The bill provides explicit subgrant priorities and cost considerations for children with disabilities. Would students be better off under this? — Parents engaged in secondary, postsecondary, or adult education programs qualify for child care assistance. Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this? — Young adult parents benefit from expanded eligible activities like job training and higher education while accessing child care assistance. Would Black Americans be better off under this? — Populations in underserved and high-poverty areas, which often include significant minority concentrations, stand to benefit from targeted supply expansion. Would Hispanic Americans be better off under this? — Targeted support for underserved areas and high-poverty regions helps expand child care access for Hispanic communities. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — Middle-class families benefit from broader eligibility definitions and enhanced parental choice in child care programs. Would Native Americans be better off under this? — The bill includes dedicated provisions, funding allotments, and considerations for Indian Tribes and Tribal organizations. Would people in cities be better off under this? — The bill addresses urban submarkets and geographic cost variations in child care delivery. Would immigrants be better off under this? — Eligible activities include English as a second language classes, supporting immigrant parents seeking education and employment. Would men be better off under this? — Fathers and male caregivers benefit from broader definitions of eligible activities and improved access to child care. Would people over 65 be better off under this? — Grandparents or relatives acting as kinship caregivers or older parents of eligible children receive supportive provisions under the bill. Would billionaires be better off under this? — Asset caps exclude individuals with high net worth from receiving child care subsidies. Would high-income households be better off under this? — The inclusion of a $1,000,000 family asset cap restricts certain families from receiving child care assistance regardless of immediate cash flow. Would people with substantial wealth be better off under this? — Asset limitations for assistance eligibility negatively impact families holding significant assets above the threshold. Would the very wealthiest people be better off under this? — Asset limits on child care assistance eligibility apply restrictions to higher-wealth brackets.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this make child care cost less? — The legislation reauthorizes and updates child care block grants, establishes cost estimation models for payment rates, and provides grants for supply expansion. Is this likely to lift people out of poverty? — Assisting low-income families with child care access and enabling parents to engage in work or education helps support poverty reduction. Does this expand the rights of people with disabilities? — The bill explicitly prioritizes and supports child care options and funding for children with disabilities. Does this narrow the gap between how men and women are treated? — Expanding accessible child care options helps reduce barriers to workforce participation typically faced by women and primary caregivers.
- Economy And Finance
- Is this likely to create jobs? — The bill supports the recruitment, training, and retention of child care workers and expands facilities, creating employment opportunities in the sector. Does this make it easier to run a small business? — The bill provides business technical assistance, shared services initiatives, and grant opportunities for child care providers. Is this likely to grow the economy? — By expanding child care availability and supporting working parents, the bill facilitates workforce participation and economic productivity. Does this reduce what the federal government spends? — The legislation authorizes new appropriations and grant programs for child care services and facilities.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — The bill enhances reporting requirements, state progress analyses, and public notifications regarding child care funding and availability. Does this leave more decisions to the states? — The legislation preserves and emphasizes state flexibility in developing mixed delivery systems and cost estimation models.
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Does this invest in rural communities? — The bill specifically targets child care supply and access improvements for rural and underserved areas.
- 9/15/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 8/6/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 7/27/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 7/20/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 7/2/2026
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- 6/9/2026
- Referred to the Committee on Education and Workforce, and in addition to the Committee on 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.
- 3 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in House
One bill Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Salud CarbajalDemocrat · California
Brian FitzpatrickRepublican · Pennsylvania
Josh HarderDemocrat · California
Ashley HinsonRepublican · Iowa
Zoe LofgrenDemocrat · California
Susie LeeDemocrat · Nevada
Joseph MorelleDemocrat · New York
Kristen McDonald RivetDemocrat · Michigan
Robert WittmanRepublican · Virginia