A Democratic bill with 4 Democratic cosponsors · See all 4 cosponsors
Last activity — Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
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
S. 5570 establishes a federal jobs initiative administered by the Secretary of Labor to help long-term unemployed workers find work through local boards and community organizations. The legislation provides funding for temporary program positions, wages, career services, supportive services, and training services. Participating employers must meet specific selection criteria, adhere to nondisplacement rules to protect existing employees, and follow grievance procedures. The bill also awards competitive grants to local boards in high-poverty areas and areas with chronically low employment rates. Additionally, the measure includes performance accountability measures, audits, and reporting requirements for local boards and participating employers.
Yes· 3 of 26
- Scored +7
Would households on low incomes be better off under this?
The bill provides wage subsidies, training services, and targeted competitive grants specifically for high-poverty areas to assist low-income and long-term unemployed individuals.
- Scored +7
Is this likely to create jobs?
The bill establishes a federal jobs initiative administered by the Secretary of Labor to fund temporary program positions and help long-term unemployed workers find work.
- Scored +6
Is this likely to lift people out of poverty?
The bill awards competitive grants and targeted funding to local boards specifically in high-poverty areas to help lift individuals out of chronic joblessness and poverty.
The opposite
No question was scored the opposite.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Support for overcoming barriers to employment: Under Section 2(b)(1), the bill helps individuals overcome barriers keeping them out of the workforce, such as transportation, child care, job readiness training, and substance abuse treatment. This is positive because it directly targets the practical obstacles that prevent people from securing permanent jobs.
-
Job generation and skill training: Under Section 4(a)(4), the Secretary of Labor provides payments to local boards to cover wages, compensation, career services, supportive services, and training services for eligible workers. This provision is beneficial because it creates active work opportunities and builds skills for individuals who have been long-term unemployed.
-
Prioritizing high-poverty and low-employment areas: Under Section 5(b) and Section 5(d), the Secretary awards competitive grants to local boards and prioritizes areas with high poverty or low prime working-age employment-to-population ratios. This helps direct financial support to the communities hit hardest by chronic joblessness.
-
Protection against employee displacement: Under Section 4(f)(1), participating employers are prohibited from placing an eligible worker in a program position if it would result in the layoff, reduced hours, reduced wages, or reduced benefits of an existing employee. This safeguards current workers from losing their jobs or seeing their compensation reduced due to the program.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Burdensome reporting requirements for workers: Under Section 4(e)(4), in order to be eligible for a program position, an eligible worker must submit a detailed report to the Secretary of Labor specifying their most recent employment details, reasons for termination, and any artificial intelligence used during their employment or job-seeking process. This creates an administrative burden and potential privacy hurdle for job seekers who simply want to get back to work.
-
Mandatory cost-sharing for employers in certain areas: Under Section 4(i)(1)(A), local boards carrying out programs in areas where the unemployment rate does not exceed 5 percent must require participating employers to cover a 33 percent employer share for wages and compensation. This financial requirement might discourage some businesses in those areas from participating and offering jobs to long-term unemployed workers.
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? — The bill provides wage subsidies, training services, and targeted competitive grants specifically for high-poverty areas to assist low-income and long-term unemployed individuals. Would Black Americans be better off under this? — By prioritizing high-poverty areas and mandating disaggregated reporting by race and ethnicity, the bill directs resources to communities frequently impacted by systemic joblessness. Would Hispanic Americans be better off under this? — Targeting high-poverty and low-employment regions helps direct job opportunities and supportive services to disproportionately affected Hispanic communities. Would Native Americans be better off under this? — The focus on chronically low-employment areas and high-poverty regions extends valuable workforce development resources to underserved Native American communities. Would people with disabilities be better off under this? — The legislation incorporates programs to support competitive integrated employment for individuals with disabilities alongside vocational rehabilitation. Would people in rural areas be better off under this? — Rural communities with chronically low prime working-age employment ratios are prioritized for competitive grants and specialized workforce development support. Would union members be better off under this? — The bill includes strict nondisplacement protections for existing employees, requires labor organization consultation, and respects collective bargaining agreements. Would people in cities be better off under this? — Urban areas with high poverty and chronic joblessness are major targets for competitive grants and local board jobs initiatives. Would veterans be better off under this, taking everything together? — The bill explicitly aligns jobs programs with veteran employment and training programs and prioritizes veteran-owned small businesses among participating employers. Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this? — The findings note low confidence among young workers, and the bill creates active work and training opportunities targeted at helping individuals re-enter the workforce. Would business owners be better off under this? — Participating employers receive wage and compensation reimbursements, as well as support for on-the-job training programs. Would immigrants be better off under this? — The act assists long-term unemployed workers who are authorized to work in the United States, providing them with training and career placement services. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — The program helps long-term unemployed individuals secure stable employment and increase household income, benefiting middle-class stability in affected communities. Would students be better off under this? — The bill incorporates pre-apprenticeship programs, registered apprenticeships, and recognized postsecondary credentials that build long-term career skills. Would women be better off under this? — Supportive services provided under the act explicitly include child care assistance, which heavily benefits women seeking to re-enter the workforce. Would farmers be better off under this? — Rural and agricultural communities facing economic distress or low employment rates can benefit from the targeted grants and local workforce programs. Would people over 65 be better off under this? — Older workers facing long-term unemployment can benefit from the targeted job placement, career services, and supportive services established by the act.
- Economy And Finance
- Is this likely to create jobs? — The bill establishes a federal jobs initiative administered by the Secretary of Labor to fund temporary program positions and help long-term unemployed workers find work. Is this likely to grow the economy? — By providing targeted funding to generate work opportunities and support high-poverty areas, the bill helps stimulate local economic activity and re-engage chronically unemployed workers. Does this make it easier to run a small business? — The legislation facilitates participation by small and disadvantaged businesses, providing support and wage reimbursements for participating employers.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Is this likely to lift people out of poverty? — The bill awards competitive grants and targeted funding to local boards specifically in high-poverty areas to help lift individuals out of chronic joblessness and poverty. Does this make child care cost less? — The legislation provides supportive services including child care assistance to help workers overcome practical barriers keeping them out of the workforce. Is this likely to reduce homelessness? — The jobs program aligns with continuum of care projects aimed at ending homelessness and addresses barriers keeping vulnerable individuals out of work.
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Does this invest in rural communities? — Competitive grants and targeted employment programs prioritize high-poverty and chronically low-employment areas, which frequently include rural communities.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — The bill mandates performance accountability measures, regular audits, reporting requirements, and disaggregated demographic data reporting for local boards.
- Healthcare
- Does this make health care easier to get in general? — The bill provides supportive services to help individuals overcome barriers to employment, which explicitly includes substance abuse treatment.
- 9/28/2026
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
- 4 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in Senate
2 bills Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Richard BlumenthalDemocrat · Connecticut
Christopher MurphyDemocrat · Connecticut
Jeff MerkleyDemocrat · Oregon
Ron WydenDemocrat · Oregon