Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on the Budget, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for considerat…
The Period PROUD Act directs $200 million per year (FY2026–FY2029) through the Social Services Block Grant to expand access to menstrual products for low-income people. It defines eligible recipients (states, tribes, local governments, and qualified nonprofits), allowable uses, a 9% administrative cap, reporting and evaluation requirements, and HHS guidance deadlines.
Scope: federal funding for menstrual products versus local/charitable solutions
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a well-specified substantive funding measure that amends SSBG authorities to provide targeted resources for menstrual products.
The Period PROUD Act directs $200 million per year (FY2026–FY2029) through the Social Services Block Grant to expand access to menstrual products for low-income people.
It defines eligible recipients (states, tribes, local governments, and qualified nonprofits), allowable uses, a 9% administrative cap, reporting and evaluation requirements, and HHS guidance deadlines.
The bill also authorizes up to $6 million for administration and exempts these funds from sequestration.
Modest, well-scoped spending for a low-salience, non-controversial need increases plausibility, but new appropriations and floor dynamics reduce certainty.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a well-specified substantive funding measure that amends SSBG authorities to provide targeted resources for menstrual products. It contains clear fiscal provisions, statutory cross-references, definitions, allowable uses, and built-in evaluation and reporting requirements.
Scope: federal funding for menstrual products versus local/charitable solutions
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Scope: federal funding for menstrual products versus local/charitable solutions
This persona would view the bill favorably as a targeted, dignity-preserving policy addressing period poverty and health equity.
They would highlight explicit funding, anti-supplanting language, and evaluation requirements as strengths.
They may push for robust outreach to marginalized communities and larger long-term funding.
A centrist would see this as a narrowly targeted social service expansion with built-in reporting and an evaluation.
They would appreciate anti-supplanting rules and administrative caps but want clearer cost offsets and outcome metrics.
They are generally supportive if oversight and measurable results are required.
A conservative would likely oppose or be skeptical, viewing this as federal expansion into local charity and personal care items.
Concerns would focus on additional federal spending, precedent for targeted entitlements, and federal involvement in distributing consumer products.
Some may accept state-led or charitable delivery instead.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Modest, well-scoped spending for a low-salience, non-controversial need increases plausibility, but new appropriations and floor dynamics reduce certainty.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Scope: federal funding for menstrual products versus local/charitable solutions
Modest, well-scoped spending for a low-salience, non-controversial need increases plausibility, but new appropriations and floor dynamics r…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a well-specified substantive funding measure that amends SSBG authorities to provide targeted resources for menstrual products. It contains clear fiscal provisions…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.