Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 53 · Passed House · Nov 17, 2020
Child Care is Economic Development Act of 2020 or the CED Act
This bill requires grant applicants for certain public works and economic development projects to describe in their comprehensive economic development strategy how they will increase the accessibility of affordable, quality child care.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H5851)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H5851)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 8326.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H5851-5853)
Ms. Norton moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 476.
Committee on Financial Services discharged.
Committee on Financial Services discharged.
Reported by the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. H. Rept. 116-578, Part I.
Reported by the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. H. Rept. 116-578, Part I.
Ordered to be Reported by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management Discharged.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management.
Referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, 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.
Referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, 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.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Bill text & related measures
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Sep 8, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Explore the bill from different angles
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.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze H.R.8326 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.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine H.R.8326 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.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine H.R.8326 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.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine H.R.8326 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.