hold on there's just too much going on in Congress lmao...
Funds hiring and training of public health nurses across communities.
Sen. Markey (D-MA), Duckworth (D-IL), Wyden (D-OR).
Introduced in Senate, awaiting committee action.
This bill, S. 3604, known as the Public Health Nursing Act, would require the Department of Health and Human Services to fund efforts to establish and grow the public health nursing workforce. It was introduced by Senators Markey, Duckworth, and Wyden, all Democrats. Currently, the bill is in the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, meaning it needs a vote there before moving to the full Senate.
Introduced Jan 8, 2026
This bill has been introduced in the Senate and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. It must be approved by this committee before it can be considered for a vote by the full Senate. If passed by the Senate, it would then need to pass the House of Representatives and be signed by the President to become law.
If this bill passes, communities, especially those with high rates of chronic disease or maternal issues, could see an increase in available public health nurses. These nurses would provide health education and services, potentially improving local health outcomes. Additionally, areas currently lacking health professionals or serving low-income populations might receive more resources to staff public health facilities, including mobile clinics and home visits, making healthcare more accessible.
Supporters Say
This bill would strengthen public health infrastructure and improve health equity by increasing access to vital nursing services.
Critics Say
The significant federal spending proposed may be seen as excessive, or critics might argue local solutions are more appropriate.
Supporters would likely emphasize the critical role of public health nurses in preventing disease and managing health conditions, especially in underserved communities. They may highlight the bill's focus on maternal and infant health and addressing health disparities. Potential critics might raise concerns about the $50 billion authorized spending over ten years, arguing about the federal government's role versus state and local responsibilities, or question the overall cost-effectiveness.