PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 21, 2025
More Options to Develop and Enhance Remote Nutrition in WIC Act of 2025 or the MODERN WIC Act of 2025
This bill permanently allows individuals to remotely certify their eligibility for, and receive benefits through, the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC).
Specifically, the bill requires that a state agency allow an individual seeking a WIC certification, recertification, or a nutritional risk evaluation to do so by phone or through video teleconference, in addition to the in-person option.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
A state agency has 90 days to collect data for a nutritional risk evaluation for a remotely certified individual. Further, a state agency may consider an applicant who meets the income eligibility standards to be temporarily eligible on an interim basis to participate in the program and may certify the individual for immediate participation without waiting for a nutritional risk evaluation.
The bill also allows states to provide benefits on WIC electronic benefit transfer cards through mail or remote issuance instead of requiring participants to pick up or reload benefits in person at a WIC office.
Further, the Department of Agriculture must report to Congress about the use of remote technologies and other digital tools in the WIC program.
Currently, individuals are generally required to be physically present to certify their WIC eligibility and receive benefits, with exceptions. The Food and Nutrition Service has temporarily waived these requirements and allowed remote certification and benefits using authorities that were provided by laws that were enacted to address COVID-19.
People & committees
Rep. Fitzpatrick, Brian K. [R-PA-1] · R–PA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We also preserved the text version used in the PlainBill explanation below.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Oct 16, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.1464 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.1464 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.1464 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.1464 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.
PlainBill explanation
Based on the full Introduced in House · 2025-02-21 text. This explanation has not received human editorial review. This overview describes the proposal’s major provisions; it does not establish what its real-world effects would be.
The bill would require state agencies to offer both in-person appointments and at least one live remote option for people applying for or renewing WIC nutrition assistance, a program for women, infants, and children. Remote certification would still require collection of body measurements used to assess nutritional risk. Agencies could also deliver benefit documents or cards without requiring participants to visit a local office.
A State agency shall ensure that appointments for individuals seeking certification, recertification, or a nutritional risk evaluation for participation in the program authorized under this section are offered— (I) in-person; and (II) either— (aa) by telephone; (bb) through video technology that permits 2-way, real time interactive communications; or (cc) through other formats that permit 2-way, real time interactive communications, as determined by the Secretary.
If an individual is certified for participation in the program under clause (i) through a format other than in-person, a State agency shall— (I) to the maximum extent practicable, collect anthropometric data necessary to evaluate the nutritional risk of that individual within 30 days of the appointment; and (II) collect such data not later than 90 days after the appointment.
State agencies may provide for the delivery of food instruments, including electronic benefit transfer cards, to any participant through means that do not require the participant to travel to the local agency to obtain food instruments, such as through mailing or remote issuance.
the special supplemental nutrition program for women, infants, and children established by section 17 of the Child Nutrition Act of 1966
Section 1 would name the proposal the MODERN WIC Act of 2025, short for the More Options to Develop and Enhance Remote Nutrition in WIC Act of 2025.
This Act may be cited as the More Options to Develop and Enhance Remote Nutrition in WIC Act of 2025 or the MODERN WIC Act of 2025.
State agencies would have to offer in-person appointments plus at least one remote option for eligibility approval, renewal, and nutritional risk evaluations. Remote options could be telephone, live two-way video, or another live two-way format approved by the Secretary; agencies would not have to offer every remote format.
A State agency shall ensure that appointments for individuals seeking certification, recertification, or a nutritional risk evaluation for participation in the program authorized under this section are offered— (I) in-person; and (II) either— (aa) by telephone; (bb) through video technology that permits 2-way, real time interactive communications; or (cc) through other formats that permit 2-way, real time interactive communications, as determined by the Secretary.
Every offered appointment format would have to be accessible under the Americans with Disabilities Act and section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act.
Any format made available for an appointment under clause (i) shall be accessible to an individual in accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 12101 et seq.) and section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. 794).
After remote certification, a state agency would have to collect the body measurements needed to assess nutritional risk within 30 days of the appointment to the maximum extent practicable. Collection would be mandatory no later than 90 days after the appointment.
If an individual is certified for participation in the program under clause (i) through a format other than in-person, a State agency shall— (I) to the maximum extent practicable, collect anthropometric data necessary to evaluate the nutritional risk of that individual within 30 days of the appointment; and (II) collect such data not later than 90 days after the appointment.
A state agency could immediately grant temporary eligibility to an applicant who meets income standards without waiting for a nutritional risk evaluation. This would be optional for the agency, and the evaluation would have to be completed within 90 days after certification.
A State agency may consider an applicant who meets the income eligibility standards to be temporarily eligible on an interim basis to participate in the program and may certify any such individual for participation immediately, without delaying certification until a nutritional risk evaluation is made.
A nutritional risk evaluation of such individual shall be completed not later than 90 days after the individual is certified for participation pursuant to subclause (I).
The termination rule would end certification if the agency failed to collect the required data by the remote-appointment deadline or if the individual was later found not to meet nutritional risk criteria. Termination would occur at the 90-day deadline after the appointment or on the date of that determination, respectively.
(II) collect such data not later than 90 days after the appointment.
If a State agency does not collect data in accordance with clause (iii)(II) or the individual is subsequently determined to not meet nutritional risk criteria, the certification of that individual shall terminate on the date described in such clause (iii)(II) or the date of such determination, as applicable.
State agencies could deliver food instruments—documents or electronic benefit cards used to obtain program food—to any participant without requiring travel to a local agency. Mailing and remote issuance would be permitted examples, rather than mandatory delivery methods.
State agencies may provide for the delivery of food instruments, including electronic benefit transfer cards, to any participant through means that do not require the participant to travel to the local agency to obtain food instruments, such as through mailing or remote issuance.
Section 3 would replace references to mailed vouchers in existing state-plan and plan-disapproval provisions with broader references to food instruments delivered by mail, remote issuance, or other means. It would also require the Secretary to delete paragraph (4) of the federal regulation at 7 C.F.R. 246.12(r). The supplied text does not reproduce the full existing provisions or the paragraph to be deleted.
(1) in the third sentence— (A) by striking vouchers by mail and inserting food instruments by mail, remote issuance, or other means; and (B) by striking The Secretary and inserting the following: (iii) Disapproval of state plan The Secretary
(2) in the second sentence— (A) by striking vouchers by mail in its plan and inserting food instruments by mail, remote issuance, or other means in the State plan; and (B) by striking The State and inserting the following: (ii) State plan The State
The Secretary shall revise section 246.12(r) of title 7, Code of Federal Regulations, by striking paragraph (4).
Within one year after enactment, the Secretary would have to report on WIC's use of remote technologies to the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry and the House Committee on Education and the Workforce.
Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry of the Senate and the Committee on Education and the Workforce of the House of Representatives a report on the use of remote technologies under the special supplemental nutrition program for women, infants, and children
The report would describe remote tools used for eligibility approval, nutrition education, and breastfeeding support, and their effects on certifications, appointments, and participant satisfaction. It would also describe best practices for remote certification, digital tools, remote support services, and secure participant-data management. These are required subjects for study, not established findings about the bill's effects.
The report submitted under subsection (a) shall include a description of— (1) the use of remote technologies and other digital tools, including video, telephone, and online platforms— (A) to certify eligible individuals for program services; and (B) to provide nutrition education and breastfeeding support to program participants; (2) the impact of remote technologies, including video, telephone, and online platforms, on certifications, appointments, and participant satisfaction under the program
(3) best practices to— (A) certify program participants for program services using remote technologies; (B) incorporate the use of digital tools into the program certification process; (C) integrate nutrition education and breastfeeding support services for program participants into remote technologies and platforms; and (D) securely manage program participant data.
The supplied actions snapshot, updated October 16, 2026, records introduction in the House and referral to the House Committee on Education and Workforce on February 21, 2025. It does not establish subsequent legislative action or enactment.
Source snapshot updated 2026-10-16T08:05:42Z. 2025-02-21: Referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce. 2025-02-21: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2025-02-21. These findings describe provisions and who may benefit; they are not judgments of waste, corruption, or motive.
This review covers the supplied bill text. “None identified” does not rule out provisions in later versions or accompanying reports and disclosures.
Provisions outside the bill’s main subject, or policy changes attached to appropriations.
None identified in the reviewed text
No unrelated provision or policy rider attached to appropriations was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion applies only to that version, not other versions or accompanying materials.
Spending directed to particular recipients or places outside ordinary competitive or formula-based allocation.
None identified in the reviewed text
No congressionally directed spending for a particular recipient or place was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish the contents of absent earmark disclosures or accompanying materials.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
None identified in the reviewed text
No materially narrow preferential carve-out or special exemption was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. General program access and accessibility protections do not by themselves constitute preferential treatment. This conclusion applies only to the supplied version.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Oct 16, 2026. How PlainBill uses AI