Each new year brings new laws affecting law enforcement. One signed into law just in time for 2026 allows departments to use existing grant funds to purchase high quality, standardized trauma kits for officers to carry in the field. The bill’s sponsors noted specifically that the kits are especially useful for rural officers, who are likely to be far from professional medical care yet first on scene to critical incidents. The LEOSA Reform Act, which corrects inconsistencies in retired officers’ ability to legally carry concealed weapons in some venues, and the Protect and Serve Act, which creates a new federal penalty for assaults on officers, have drawn media attention and law enforcement support. Both are still working their way through the legislative process and are considered likely to pass into law this year.
These three bills address compelling and charismatic issues associated with the physical risks of a law enforcement career.
Meanwhile, four less-glamorous bills languish in the legislative process, all of them with the potential to improve quality-of-life issues that batter retention and job satisfaction in small, rural and remote places.
| RELATED: How to influence law and policymakers
Helping first responders buy their first home
The HELPER Act (HR 1514/S 1514) was first proposed in 2023 by then-Senator Marco Rubio. It is modeled on the VA Home Loan Program and eliminates the requirement for a down payment or mortgage insurance, both obstacles to buyers in expensive or low-paying markets.
The HELPER Act can only be used once rather than multiple times like the VA program. However, the HELPER Act requires homes to conform only to FHA/HUD standards to qualify for the loan; the VA program has more restrictive standards for qualifying homes. This may enable first responders in rural places near attractions that drive up home prices (coastlines, ski resorts, national parks) to use a HELPER Act loan for non-traditional housing like condos, manufactured homes on foundations, or a plot of land plus a new manufactured home to set on a foundation. These options can be difficult to finance with traditional mortgages but provide flexibility where housing is scarce or pay scales are inadequate.
The HELPER Act remains in committee but is expected to begin moving through Congress again in early 2026. It has bipartisan support with 30 Democratic sponsors, eight Republican sponsors, and one independent.
Helping cops find childcare
The Providing Childcare for Police Officers Act of 2023 (HR 2722) was written to provide solutions for law enforcement families juggling shift work and nontraditional hours. Unpredictable schedules, nights and weekends can make childcare difficult to find; childcare of any sort may be unavailable in rural and remote places. A city or county could use the funds to establish their own facility for law enforcement families, for example, and there is also provision for special circumstances like accessing care for a child with disabilities.
The bill proposed making competitive grant funds available for states to distribute on a three- year cycle with match funds beginning at 10% and increasing up to 33⅔% in the third year. Twenty percent or more of available funds would be reserved for agencies with fewer than 200 full-time employees. It’s not a perfect solution but at least the bill’s sponsors acknowledge the problem.
In smaller towns and remote places, a lack of child care heavily impacts decisions about remaining in law enforcement, or accepting a new position. I’ve interviewed female officers who have moved to be near family to help, and others who have simply left for other career fields, but it’s not a “girl problem.” It overlaps with low pay and high costs of living: when a trailing spouse cannot work because there’s no child care available, financial constraints can force change even on dedicated officers who enjoy their jobs.
I’m not convinced that enough of the grant funding would trickle down to the agencies who need help the most (large departments are already experimenting with their own childcare centers anyway), considering that there are 18,000 discrete law enforcement agencies in the country, and the majority of them are much smaller than 200 officers.
The bill is currently expired despite strong bipartisan support (15 sponsors from each party)and would have to be reintroduced.
| RELATED: Enhancing recruitment and retention: Employee child care for law enforcement agencies
A pathway to healthcare coverage for retired and disabled officers
The Expanding Healthcare Options for First Responders Act (HR 6147), repeatedly reintroduced and expired since 2021, has been introduced once again by Rep. Greg Landsman of Ohio. This bill would allow first responders who retire or are separated by disability to buy into Medicare if they are between the ages of 50 and 64.
While many departments provide health insurance for active officers, contractual coverage for retirees is increasingly rare and expensive. It’s common for first responders to retire before 65 because of the physical demands of the job, so they don’t qualify for Medicare yet, and there is no equivalent of VA care for officers forced to retire because of line-of-duty injuries. HR 6147 is a potential bridge across that chasm.
This version of the bill is in the very early stages of its first committee referral; progress will depend on congressional priorities, and on gaining stronger bipartisan and bicameral support. Currently there are only three cosponsors, all Democrats.
Collective bargaining rights for everybody. Almost.
The Public Safety Employer-Employee Cooperation Act (HR 1505), introduced by Rep. Pete Stauber of Minnesota, would establish a right to form a union and bargain collectively for law enforcement, firefighters and EMS. In many places, especially where officers work at-will, this would be unprecedented. The bill would not override right -to-work laws; legally, employers could not prevent employees from forming a union but no employee could be forced to join either. Any state with existing laws protecting collective bargaining rights that are equivalent or stronger to the bill’s proposal would remain as is. Strikes and lockouts would remain prohibited.
In theory, this bill could lead to significant improvements for some officers, which could impact recruiting and retention. Research demonstrates that employees who feel they have no control over their situation are more likely to be stressed and burn out; collective bargaining ensures a measure of participation in their condition. Union employees in general are paid more, a huge consideration in parts of the US where some officers are paid literal poverty wages. There are also studies indicating that union members are less likely to leave their jobs than unrepresented employees and that improvement in one workplace encourages improvement in neighboring ones even when they aren’t unionized.
There are several caveats. First, allowing collective bargaining does not establish a civil service system. At-will employees are still at-will, and if an employer can fire them for any reason or none, it would be difficult to prove retaliation for union activity.
Also (and this one is big), HR 1505 provides an out for the departments most likely to be affected by low pay and harsh working conditions. Scroll down the text near the bottom, and you will find a section exempting places with fewer than 5,000 residents, and agencies with fewer than 25 employees from compliance.
The bill was introduced in February 2025 and has not moved out of committee to be marked up or debated. There are 49 cosponsors, 8 Republicans and 41 Democrats. Despite endorsement by a significant number of unions during the 2024 campaign, the current administration has been unpredictable about labor concerns since taking office, so if the bill moves forward before expiring, it’s hard to guess whether it would be signed into law.
Why do these bills matter now?
Retaining seasoned officers and attracting quality candidates are two of the most pressing concerns in law enforcement, as decision makers wrestle with evolving expectations, cultural pressures, an exodus of institutional knowledge, and a rising work force whose priorities baffle a very traditional profession. Since this is the case, why not put extra effort into bread and butter, quality of life improvements?
Of course it is honorable to see that criminals who harm cops are prosecuted vigorously. It makes sense that all retired officers can carry their weapons without penalty, no matter where they live. Trauma kits should be everywhere.
But I assert that these issues aren’t the ones that are driving good officers out the door. If they can’t buy a home, find childcare or have any say in their environment and also know that if they make it to retirement, they will be crippled by the cost of healthcare, they’re going to make the practical decision to find a different line of work.
Legislative advocacy needs to become the norm for law enforcement professionals. Reviving these four bills and lighting a fire under their sponsors is a practical place to start.
