PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Labor and Human Resources.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Feb 23, 1995
Child Care Consolidation and Investment Act of 1995 - Amends the Child Care and Development Block Grant Act of 1990 to appropriate funds for FY 1996 through 2000 for child care services for eligible children through the awarding of grants to States. Directs the Secretary of Health and Human Services, if the amounts appropriated are insufficient to provide services to each child whose parent is required to undertake education, job training or search, or employment as a condition of eligibility under part A (Aid to Families with Dependent Children) (AFDC) of title IV of the Social Security Act, to pay sums necessary to ensure the implementation of State plans for child care and development for each child. Requires (currently, authorizes) child care and development block grants for States. Decreases from 25 to 20 percent the amount of funds to be reserved by States per fiscal year for activities to improve the quality of child care and to provide before- and after-school and early childhood development services. Directs States to reserve at least 50 percent of grant amounts for child care activities to support low-income working families. Requires State plans to assure that the availability of child care will be coordinated with AFDC requirements and to ensure that the parent of a dependent child is not required to undertake an education, job training or search, or employment requirement unless child care assistance is available. Sets forth a matching requirement for States with respect to amounts that exceed amounts received in FY 1995. Increases to 50 (currently, 20) percent the minimum percentage of reserved amounts States must use to carry out specified activities to improve the quality of child care. Directs the Secretary to establish a child care quality improvement incentive initiative to make funds available to States that demonstrate progress in the implementation of: (1) innovative teacher training programs; or (2) enhanced child care quality standards and licensing and monitoring procedures. Decreases from 75 to 50 percent the minimum percentage of reserved amounts States must use to carry out early child development and before- and after-school services. Requires amounts allotted to States under this Act to include the base amount such States received under the Child Care and Development Block Grant Act of 1990 and under AFDC provisions repealed under this Act. Repeals specified AFDC provisions and the Child Development Assistance Associate Scholarship Assistance Act of 1985.
People & committees
Sen. Dodd, Christopher J. [D-CT] · D–CT
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 Labor and Human Resources.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S3061-3062)
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 21, 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.472 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.472 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.472 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.472 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.