Indefinitely postponed
Require the Department of Health and Human Services to file a state plan amendment relating to child care ↗
latest roll call: ADVANCE TO E&R INITIAL HOUSE UNDER CALL · 03/05/2025 · Yea 25 · Nay 14 · Not voting/absent 10 (Vote Record)
| Sponsor | Sen. Machaela Cavanaugh (District 6) (Introduced 01/09/2025) |
|---|---|
| Sponsor Ranking | The Nebraska Legislature is officially nonpartisan, and no published ideology measurement of its members is in our database - so none is shown. This page shows how members voted, never where anyone places them. |
| KJV verdict | NEITHER · 0 grounds ↓ |
| Committees | Health and Human Services |
| Latest Action | 04/17/2026 Indefinitely postponed |
| Roll Call Votes | 3 |
| Source | view on nebraskalegislature.gov (new tab) → |
Brief (4)
If it passes, what changes
This is an amendment bill rewriting Nebraska's child care subsidy statute and ordering one new federal filing. It changes income limits, adds a payment method requirement, and repeals the old text it replaces.
- §1 sets child care assistance eligibility at 185% of poverty before October 1, 2026, then 130% after.
- §1 disregards 10% of a household's gross earned income after twelve continuous months on the program.
- §1 requires DHHS to file a state plan amendment to pay providers by enrollment/authorized hours, not attendance.
- §1 requires licensed child care employers to accommodate an employee so they aren't their own child's primary caregiver, effective July 1, 2025.
- §1 lets a licensed provider enroll a household member's child in a different program for assistance, effective July 1, 2025.
- §2 repeals the prior version of section 68-1206.
Does it do what it claims
The title names only the state plan amendment requirement, and §1 does contain that exact requirement, but the bill also does more than the title says.
- §1 carries the state plan amendment language the title describes, inside the existing provider rate-schedule subsection.
- The title doesn't mention the income-eligibility, disregard, or transitional-assistance changes also made in §1.
- The title doesn't mention the reasonable-accommodation and cross-enrollment rules added in §1.
- §1 attaches no dollar figure or appropriation to the state plan amendment requirement.
The case each way
Supporters see the changes as protecting providers' income and easing families off the program gradually; opponents see cost and access risks.
- For: §1's enrollment/hours-based payment shields provider revenue from a child's day-to-day absences.
- For: §1's income disregard and transitional assistance keep working families from losing care as pay rises.
- Against: §1 doesn't say who absorbs the cost gap between attendance-based and enrollment-based provider payment.
- Against: §1 tightens the eligibility ceiling to 130% of poverty on and after October 1, 2026.
What the text cannot settle
The text fixes what must change and when, but leaves several practical questions to the department.
- §1 sets no deadline for DHHS to file the required state plan amendment.
- §1 doesn't define "authorized hours" for the new provider payment method.
- §1 states no fiscal estimate for shifting providers from attendance-based to enrollment-based payment.
- §1's restriction against using General Funds for the 2021 eligibility costs ends September 30, 2026, with no named funding source after.
- §2's repeal is procedural, replacing old text with §1's version; the bill states no severability or transition rule.
Written by claude-sonnet-5 from the Introduced of this bill on 2026-09-13, and from nothing else. It is a reading, not a source: bullets naming a section this bill does not contain are dropped before the page is built, but the prose is not otherwise checked. The verdict above does not come from it.
KJV verdict (0)
NEITHER — The KJV does not speak to this bill
The only thing this bill changes is how the state pays child care providers: by a child's enrollment or authorized hours instead of by attendance. Everything else in the bill is existing law restated so the section can be re-enacted. The Bible does not speak to whether a subsidy should be paid on enrollment or on attendance, so no verse reaches this bill.
Read against the KJV standard from the Introduced text on 2026-09-13. Every quotation of the bill is checked against the bill's text and every verse is quoted from the 1769 text, not from the model.
Text (1)
- Introduced (new tab) (application/pdf)
Each link opens the legislature's own document.
All Actions (19)
| Date | Actor | All Actions |
|---|---|---|
| 04/17/2026 | Indefinitely postponed | |
| 01/07/2026 | Title printed. Carryover bill | |
| 03/14/2025 | Cavanaugh, M. priority bill | |
| 03/11/2025 | Placed on Select File | |
| 03/05/2025 | Advanced to Enrollment and Review Initial | |
| 03/05/2025 | Cavanaugh, M. AM34 withdrawn | |
| 03/05/2025 | Health and Human Services AM249 adopted | |
| 03/05/2025 | Cavanaugh, M. AM516 adopted | |
| 03/05/2025 | Cavanaugh, M. AM516 pending | |
| 03/05/2025 | Health and Human Services AM249 pending | |
| 03/04/2025 | Cavanaugh, M. AM516 to AM249 filed | |
| 02/13/2025 | Health and Human Services AM249 filed | |
| 02/13/2025 | Placed on General File with AM249 | |
| 01/24/2025 | Cavanaugh, M. AM34 filed | |
| 01/22/2025 | Hallstrom name added | |
| 01/14/2025 | Conrad name added | |
| 01/13/2025 | Notice of hearing for January 22, 2025 | |
| 01/13/2025 | Referred to Health and Human Services Committee | |
| 01/09/2025 | Date of introduction |
Votes (3)
03/05/2025 · ADVANCE TO E&R INITIAL HOUSE UNDER CALL · 25-14-10
Yea (25): Arch, Juarez, Ballard, Bostar, Brandt, Cavanaugh, J., McKinney, Cavanaugh, M., Meyer, Clouse, Conrad, Prokop, DeBoer, Quick, Raybould, Dorn, Rountree, Dungan, Fredrickson, Guereca, Spivey, Hallstrom, Strommen, Hughes, Hunt
Nay (14): Andersen, Kauth, Lippincott, Lonowski, McKeon, Clements, Moser, Murman, Sorrentino, Hansen, Storm, Hardin, von Gillern, Wordekemper
Not voting / absent (10): Ibach, Jacobson, Armendariz, Bosn, DeKay, Riepe, Dover, Sanders, Storer, Holdcroft
03/05/2025 · AM 249 Health · 40-5-4
Yea (40): Ibach, Jacobson, Armendariz, Juarez, Lippincott, Bostar, Lonowski, Brandt, McKeon, Cavanaugh, J., McKinney, Cavanaugh, M., Meyer, Moser, Clouse, Conrad, Prokop, DeBoer, Quick, DeKay, Raybould, Dorn, Riepe, Rountree, Dungan, Sanders, Fredrickson, Sorrentino, Guereca, Spivey, Hallstrom, Hansen, Storm, Hardin, Strommen, Holdcroft, von Gillern, Hughes, Wordekemper, Hunt
Nay (5): Andersen, Kauth, Clements, Murman, Storer
Not voting / absent (4): Arch, Ballard, Bosn, Dover
03/05/2025 · AM 249 Health AM 516 Cavanaugh, M. · 35-11-3
Yea (35): Ibach, Arch, Jacobson, Armendariz, Juarez, Ballard, Bostar, Brandt, Cavanaugh, J., McKinney, Cavanaugh, M., Meyer, Clouse, Conrad, Prokop, DeBoer, Quick, DeKay, Raybould, Dorn, Riepe, Rountree, Dungan, Sanders, Fredrickson, Sorrentino, Guereca, Spivey, Hallstrom, Storm, Strommen, Holdcroft, Hughes, Wordekemper, Hunt
Nay (11): Andersen, Kauth, Lippincott, Lonowski, McKeon, Clements, Moser, Murman, Hansen, Hardin, von Gillern
Not voting / absent (3): Bosn, Dover, Storer
Every roll call as the legislature recorded it, with each member's vote by name.
Sponsors (3)
- Sen. Machaela Cavanaugh [District 6] — primary sponsor
- Sen. Bob Hallstrom [District 1] — cosponsor (01/22/2025)
- Sen. Danielle Conrad [District 46] — cosponsor (01/14/2025)
Committees (1)
| Committee | Activity | Date |
|---|---|---|
| Health and Human Services | Referred | 01/13/2025 |
Amendments (3)
Fiscal Notes & Statements (3)
The legislature's own companion documents; each link opens the official copy.
Related Bills (0)
No related bill information was received.
How this was worked out (1)
1. What was read
| version | Introduced |
| file | 01-introduced.pdf |
| sha256 | 676c54c071aa180f1aefe0fde3b425a9 |
| characters | 7,603 |
2. What it was read against
| the standard | bills/kjv_prompt.txt, sha256 79671b42553a40fe28a8ac9c8ce9e60a |
| model | claude-fable-5-1 |
| read on | 2026-09-13 |
| the model was shown | the standard -- the verses of the 1769 text, quoted in full -- and the bill's words, and nothing else |
3. The grounds (0)
| none -- the standard does not speak to what this bill does |
4. How the verdict follows
| FAIL grounds | 0 |
| PASS grounds | 0 |
| the rule | any FAIL ground fails the bill -- even one, even beside good provisions (1 Corinthians 5:6), even for a good end (Romans 3:8); PASS grounds alone pass it; no grounds, no verdict. No counting, no weighing, nothing added up. |
| verdict | NEITHER — The KJV does not speak to this bill |
5. What this cannot tell you
Every ground above quotes the bill and quotes the verse, so each can be checked. What the model did not raise cannot be checked the same way: a provision it passed over looks exactly like one that is not there. How often a ground is wrong, and how often one is missing, are not known.
Bill data comes from the Nebraska Legislature's own website, scraped and stored by our own pipeline; titles, sponsors, actions and vote tallies are shown as the Legislature published them. Nothing is generated. Nebraska's Legislature is unicameral and officially nonpartisan; its members carry no party label here because they carry none there. No published ideology measurement is in our database, so no bill or member on this site is placed on a left-right axis: every meter is a roll-call tally, labeled (Vote Record).