PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Sep 28, 2016
Anthony DeJuan Boatwright Act
This bill amends the Child Care and Development Block Grant Act of 1990 to require the state plans for the use of child care and development block grant funds to include, as part of its regulatory process for issuance and renewal of licenses to providers of child care services, a recommendation to each such provider that it carry liability insurance covering the operation of its child care business.
State plans shall certify that there is in effect within the state a requirement that each such provider for which assistance is made available: (1) post publicly and conspicuously in the service area of its premises a notice specifying whether it carries liability insurance covering the operation of its child care business; and (2) give written notice to parents about whether it carries such insurance, obtain the signature of at least one parent per child acknowledging receipt of the notice, and maintain records of the notice while a child receives services.
People & committees
Sen. Isakson, Johnny [R-GA] · R–GA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 12, 2025. 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 S.3406 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 S.3406 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 S.3406 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 S.3406 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.