Tennessee Senate Bill SB1012

Tennessee 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/5/25
• Engrossed: 3/13/25

Caption

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 71, Chapter 3, Part 5, relative to child care.

Summary

SB1012 makes a narrow change to Tennessee’s child care law by clarifying a definition in Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 71, Chapter 3, Part 5. Specifically, it revises the wording in Section 71-3-501(12) so that the listed family relationships read “siblings of the whole or half-blood, step-siblings, nieces or nephews of the whole or half-blood,” instead of the prior phrasing that grouped “nieces, nephews” without specifying whole- or half-blood. The bill does not create a new program or funding stream; it is a technical definitional amendment within the child care statutory framework. Because the bill is limited to a wording change, its practical effect is to clarify who is included in the referenced family relationship category for purposes of the child care statute. That clarification could affect how the law is interpreted or applied by agencies, providers, or families when determining eligibility or compliance under the child care provisions in Title 71. The act takes effect immediately upon becoming law.

Impact

The bill amends Tennessee Code Annotated Section 71-3-501(12) in the child care code, refining the statutory definition of family relationships by specifying “nieces or nephews of the whole or half-blood.” This is a targeted statutory clarification rather than a substantive policy overhaul, but it may influence administrative interpretation and any child care-related eligibility or exemption determinations that rely on the defined terms in Title 71, Chapter 3, Part 5.

Sentiment

The available voting history suggests generally favorable sentiment toward the bill. It was recommended for passage by the Senate Health and Welfare Committee by an 8-1 vote and then passed the floor on third consideration by a 25-6 vote. No committee transcript was provided, so the discussion record does not show detailed arguments, but the vote margins indicate broad support with some opposition.

Contention

The main point of contention appears to be limited and likely centered on whether the definitional clarification was necessary or whether the statutory language should remain unchanged. The 8-1 committee vote and 25-6 floor vote show that most legislators supported the amendment, while a smaller group opposed it. Because there are no transcripts, the specific objections are not documented, but any disagreement likely related to the precision of the family-relationship definition within the child care statute rather than the broader child care policy itself.