HB 457 would revise Montana’s Best Beginnings child care scholarship program by changing the family income eligibility standard. Under current law, the Department of Public Health and Human Services must set the qualifying income threshold at no less than 185% of the federal poverty level; this bill would replace that floor with a requirement that the threshold be set at no less than 85% of state median income for each family size. The bill also keeps the existing federal cap, requiring the maximum qualifying income level to remain no higher than what federal Child Care and Development Block Grant rules allow.
In addition to the eligibility change, the bill appropriates $17 million from the general fund to the department for each year of the 2025-2027 biennium to support the scholarship program, and it states that the appropriation should be treated as part of the ongoing base for the next legislative session. The act would take effect July 1, 2025. If enacted, it would amend section 52-2-715, MCA, and directly affect the administration of child care assistance for low- and moderate-income families.
Impact
The bill would change state law governing income eligibility for the Best Beginnings child care scholarship program by shifting the benchmark from a federal-poverty-based floor to a state-median-income-based floor. That could alter which families qualify for child care scholarships and how the department structures eligibility rules, while leaving the federal maximum eligibility ceiling in place. It also creates a new general fund appropriation of $17 million per year for the biennium, increasing state spending for child care assistance and potentially establishing a higher ongoing funding baseline.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have had some support in committee, where it received a do-pass recommendation in the House Human Services Committee by a 12-9 vote. However, it failed on the House floor on second reading by a vote of 43-55, and the bill ultimately died in process. The vote pattern suggests the proposal was viewed favorably by a coalition interested in expanding child care access, but not enough members supported it to advance through the full chamber.
Contention
The main point of contention was likely the eligibility standard and the associated cost of expanding the scholarship program. Supporters appear to have favored using state median income as a more expansive or modern benchmark and backing it with a dedicated appropriation, while opponents likely questioned the fiscal impact, the size of the general fund commitment, or whether the eligibility change would broaden the program too far. The split committee vote and the failed floor vote indicate disagreement over both policy design and budget priorities.