Adult credentials, student learning, graduation, and public-school funding.
High school or higher91.1%2020–2024 · #28 of 50 · highest first
Associate degree or higher50.3%2020–2024 · #7 of 50 · highest first
Bachelor’s degree or higher43.4%2020–2024 · #5 of 50 · highest first
Maryland over time
Explore Maryland readings, major events and reviewed actions on the same date scale. Maryland officeholders appear in separate lanes. National event evidence describes national context; it does not measure a Maryland effect.
Major events & context · A curated selection, including uncertain effects. Milestone dates do not establish that an event caused a Maryland change.
Enacted / issuedDid not proceedPending / in progressStatus unclear
Colors show the latest recorded status. Passing one chamber is not enactment. A number groups actions with the same date, body and status.
Grade 4 reading Maryland · source units
MarylandPublished U.S. benchmark
Move across the chart to inspect the nearest observation. Click or tap to keep a reading selected, or focus the chart and use the arrow keys. Hover over or focus a marker to explore; click or tap to pin. Press Escape to clear.
119 of 119 reviewed Maryland actions match · 96 date markers shown. 23 major events shown separately.
Maryland · 2024: 215.6 · Rank #20 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 215
FactVote uses NAEP Data Service mean scale scores for all public-school students in Maryland. The series uses the total student group and the main reading and mathematics composite scales for Grade 4 and Grade 8. NAEP is generally administered every two years; the 2021 administration was postponed, so the timeline moves from 2019 to 2022. NAEP results are estimates from a sample. Statistical significance, not a visual gap alone, determines whether scores differ. Each grade and subject has its own scale. Follow one line over time rather than comparing the numeric distance between grades or subjects. Annual observations use December 31; monthly observations use the first of the month. Lines connect consecutive readings and do not supply values between them. Missing observations break the lines.
The timeline combines the corresponding national fact’s reviewed event catalog, labeled National context, with individually reviewed state milestones. State events use primary sources and distinguish signing, effective and filing dates. Each milestone keeps its source-check date, geographical limits and evidence limits. This curated selection is not a complete history.
Date ranges affect events and actions. Action type, status and official-name search affect government records only. Events remain separate from action counts. An event after the latest observation extends context without creating a new reading.
Maryland · state comparison
Adult educational attainment
Adults age 25 and older. Higher credentials overlap: these measures must not be added together.
Maryland · 2020–202491.1%
Maryland rank#28among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark89.6%Same measure and period when published
#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.
High school or higher
Share of adults age 25+ with the stated credential or a higher credential.
Point-estimate ranks are not tests of statistical significance.
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Maryland stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.
Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Maryland has a dark outline.
Lower value · 84.7%Higher value · 94.9%Striped: unavailable
Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.
Maryland · 91.1%2020–2024 · Rank #28 of 50, highest firstSelected state
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare Maryland with every state · 50 ranked
High school or higher · 2020–2024 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
Vermont
94.9%
—
#2
Maine
94.8%
—
#3
Montana
94.6%
—
#4
New Hampshire
94.4%
—
#5
Wyoming
94.2%
—
#6
North Dakota
94%
—
#7
Minnesota
93.9%
—
#8
Wisconsin
93.6%
—
#9
Alaska
93.6%
—
#10
Utah
93.4%
—
#11
Iowa
93.3%
—
#12
South Dakota
93.2%
—
#13
Hawaii
93.2%
—
#14
Colorado
92.9%
—
#15
Washington
92.3%
—
#16
Nebraska
92.2%
—
#17
Pennsylvania
92.1%
—
#18
Michigan
92.1%
—
#19
Kansas
92%
—
#20
Idaho
91.9%
—
#21
Missouri
91.9%
—
#22
Oregon
91.8%
—
#23
Ohio
91.8%
—
#24
Delaware
91.7%
—
#25
Virginia
91.6%
—
#26
Connecticut
91.5%
—
#27
Massachusetts
91.4%
—
#28
Maryland · your comparison
91.1%
—
#29
New Jersey
90.7%
—
#30
Illinois
90.5%
—
#31
Indiana
90.4%
—
#32
North Carolina
90.1%
—
#33
South Carolina
90.1%
—
#34
Tennessee
90%
—
#35
Florida
89.9%
—
#36
Rhode Island
89.7%
—
#37
Oklahoma
89.4%
—
#38
Arizona
89.4%
—
#39
West Virginia
89.3%
—
#40
Georgia
89.2%
—
#41
Kentucky
88.9%
—
#42
Arkansas
88.7%
—
#43
Alabama
88.6%
—
#44
New Mexico
88%
—
#45
New York
88%
—
#46
Nevada
87.5%
—
#47
Louisiana
87.3%
—
#48
Mississippi
87.1%
—
#49
Texas
86%
—
#50
California
84.7%
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Share of Maryland residents age 25 and older whose reported attainment is a regular high school diploma or equivalent (including GED or an alternative credential), some college, or an associate’s or higher degree.
This source snapshot keeps its own definition and period. A rank shown elsewhere applies only to that comparison’s measure and period.
Method and limitations
U.S. Census Bureau QuickFacts, sourced from the American Community Survey 2020–2024 five-year estimate.
This is an adult educational-attainment measure, not a current high-school graduation rate or a measure of school quality.
A statewide estimate can obscure differences across communities and demographic groups.
NAEP state comparisons use public-school students in the same grade and subject. National benchmarks include public and private schools.
Maryland · 2024215.6
Maryland rank#20among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark215Same measure and period when published
#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.
Grade 4 reading
FactVote uses NAEP Data Service mean scale scores for all public-school students in Maryland. The series uses the total student group and the main reading and mathematics composite scales for Grade 4 and Grade 8.
NAEP is generally administered every two years; the 2021 administration was postponed, so the timeline moves from 2019 to 2022. NAEP results are estimates from a sample. Statistical significance, not a visual gap alone, determines whether scores differ. Each grade and subject has its own scale. Follow one line over time rather than comparing the numeric distance between grades or subjects.
Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.
Maryland
2024 · Maryland: 215.6 · Rank #20 of 50, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 215 · Selected for state comparisonView history and select a period
Maryland Grade 4 reading history
Period
Maryland
Compare
2003
218.7
2005
220
2007
224.8
2009
226
2011
230.8
2013
232.1
2015
222.9
2017
225
2019
219.8
2022
212.5
2024
215.6
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Maryland stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.
Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Maryland has a dark outline.
Lower value · 200.6Higher value · 224.8Striped: unavailable
Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.
Maryland · 215.62024 · Rank #20 of 50, highest firstSelected state
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare Maryland with every state · 50 ranked
Grade 4 reading · 2024 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
Massachusetts
224.8
—
#2
Wyoming
221.9
—
#3
New Jersey
221.6
—
#4
New Hampshire
221.5
—
#5
Colorado
220.9
—
#6
Indiana
220.1
—
#7
Utah
219.3
—
#8
Connecticut
219.2
—
#9
Mississippi
218.5
—
#10
Florida
218.2
—
#11
Kentucky
218
—
#12
Montana
217.2
—
#13
Rhode Island
216.3
—
#14
Louisiana
216
—
#14
Ohio
216
—
#16
Hawaii
215.8
—
#16
Pennsylvania
215.8
—
#18
Idaho
215.7
—
#18
Washington
215.7
—
#20
Maryland · your comparison
215.6
—
#21
North Dakota
215.5
—
#22
Wisconsin
215.3
—
#23
Tennessee
215.1
—
#24
South Carolina
214.9
—
#25
Iowa
214.6
—
#25
New York
214.6
—
#27
Georgia
214.4
—
#27
Minnesota
214.4
—
#29
Illinois
214.2
—
#30
South Dakota
214.1
—
#30
Virginia
214.1
—
#32
North Carolina
213.4
—
#33
Alabama
213.2
—
#34
Kansas
213.1
—
#34
Nevada
213.1
—
#36
Vermont
212.7
—
#37
Missouri
211.9
—
#37
Texas
211.9
—
#39
California
211.7
—
#39
Nebraska
211.7
—
#41
Arkansas
209.7
—
#42
Maine
209.6
—
#43
Delaware
209.5
—
#44
Michigan
209.1
—
#45
Arizona
208.1
—
#46
Oklahoma
207.3
—
#47
Oregon
207
—
#48
West Virginia
205.9
—
#49
Alaska
201.6
—
#50
New Mexico
200.6
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Compare spending per pupil and the composition of school revenue and current spending.
Maryland · FY2024$20,208
Maryland rank#15among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark$17,619Same measure and period when published
#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.
Current spending per pupil
Public elementary-secondary current spending per enrolled pupil.
Current spending excludes capital spending. More spending is not itself a measure of student outcomes.
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Maryland stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.
Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Maryland has a dark outline.
Lower value · $11.06KHigher value · $31.92KStriped: unavailable
Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.
Maryland · $20,208FY2024 · Rank #15 of 50, highest firstSelected state
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare Maryland with every state · 50 ranked
Current spending per pupil · FY2024 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
New York
$31,918
—
#2
Vermont
$28,818
—
#3
New Jersey
$27,234
—
#4
Connecticut
$26,316
—
#5
Massachusetts
$24,429
—
#6
Hawaii
$23,878
—
#7
New Hampshire
$22,978
—
#8
Delaware
$22,201
—
#9
Rhode Island
$22,110
—
#10
Illinois
$21,776
—
#11
Pennsylvania
$21,091
—
#12
Alaska
$21,004
—
#13
California
$20,791
—
#14
Wyoming
$20,521
—
#15
Maryland · your comparison
$20,208
—
#16
Maine
$19,962
—
#17
Washington
$18,564
—
#18
Michigan
$18,314
—
#19
Oregon
$18,083
—
#20
New Mexico
$17,664
—
#21
Ohio
$17,257
—
#22
Virginia
$17,104
—
#23
North Dakota
$17,102
—
#24
Minnesota
$17,098
—
#25
Nebraska
$16,147
—
#26
Wisconsin
$15,952
—
#27
Colorado
$15,908
—
#28
Georgia
$15,833
—
#29
West Virginia
$15,640
—
#30
Louisiana
$15,581
—
#31
Kansas
$15,558
—
#32
South Carolina
$15,060
—
#33
Nevada
$14,812
—
#34
Kentucky
$14,596
—
#35
Iowa
$14,369
—
#36
Missouri
$14,241
—
#37
Arkansas
$13,873
—
#38
Montana
$13,656
—
#39
Alabama
$13,627
—
#40
Indiana
$13,622
—
#41
North Carolina
$12,995
—
#42
Texas
$12,895
—
#43
Tennessee
$12,882
—
#44
South Dakota
$12,828
—
#45
Florida
$12,693
—
#46
Mississippi
$12,324
—
#47
Oklahoma
$12,162
—
#48
Arizona
$12,003
—
#49
Utah
$11,347
—
#50
Idaho
$11,060
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
The federal comparison uses a common adjusted cohort and school year. A newer state graduation snapshot, where retained, uses its own source and period; adult attainment is a separate measure.
Maryland · 2021–2286%
Maryland rank#25among 48 states with data
U.S. benchmark87%Same measure and period when published
#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.
Federal public-school cohort graduation rate
Share of the adjusted ninth-grade public-school cohort graduating in four years. From 2017–18, the federal measure counts regular diplomas and eligible state-defined alternate diplomas for students with the most significant cognitive disabilities; earlier years count regular diplomas only.
Published NCES state comparison through 2021–22. Rounded whole percentages produce tied ranks. Missing or suppressed values are excluded. Any newer state graduation snapshot uses its own period and cannot inherit this rank.
Hover to inspect. Click or tap to compare that period with every state. Focus the graph and use arrow keys, Home or End to select a period. Press Escape to return to the latest period.
Maryland
2021–22 · Maryland: 86% · Rank #25 of 48, highest first · U.S. benchmark: 87% · Selected for state comparisonView history and select a period
Maryland Federal public-school cohort graduation rate history
Period
Maryland
Compare
2011–12
84%
2012–13
85%
2013–14
86%
2014–15
87%
2015–16
88%
2016–17
88%
2017–18
87%
2018–19
87%
2019–20
87%
2020–21
87%
2021–22
86%
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Maryland stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.
Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Maryland has a dark outline.
Lower value · 77%Higher value · 91%Striped: unavailable
Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.
Maryland · 86%2021–22 · Rank #25 of 48, highest firstSelected state
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare Maryland with every state · 48 ranked, 2 unavailable
Federal public-school cohort graduation rate · 2021–22 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
West Virginia
91%
—
#2
Iowa
90%
—
#2
Kentucky
90%
—
#2
Massachusetts
90%
—
#2
Missouri
90%
—
#2
Tennessee
90%
—
#2
Texas
90%
—
#2
Wisconsin
90%
—
#9
Connecticut
89%
—
#9
Kansas
89%
—
#9
Mississippi
89%
—
#9
Virginia
89%
—
#13
Alabama
88%
—
#13
Arkansas
88%
—
#13
Delaware
88%
—
#13
Indiana
88%
—
#13
New Hampshire
88%
—
#13
Utah
88%
—
#19
California
87%
—
#19
Florida
87%
—
#19
Illinois
87%
—
#19
Nebraska
87%
—
#19
New York
87%
—
#19
Pennsylvania
87%
—
#25
Hawaii
86%
—
#25
Maine
86%
—
#25
Maryland · your comparison
86%
—
#25
Montana
86%
—
#25
North Carolina
86%
—
#25
Ohio
86%
—
#31
New Jersey
85%
—
#31
North Dakota
85%
—
#33
Georgia
84%
—
#33
Minnesota
84%
—
#33
South Carolina
84%
—
#33
Washington
84%
—
#37
Louisiana
83%
—
#37
Rhode Island
83%
—
#37
Vermont
83%
—
#40
Colorado
82%
—
#40
Nevada
82%
—
#40
South Dakota
82%
—
#40
Wyoming
82%
—
#44
Michigan
81%
—
#44
Oregon
81%
—
#46
Idaho
80%
—
#47
Alaska
78%
—
#48
Arizona
77%
—
—
New Mexico
Not available
No comparable published observation for this period; excluded from rank.
—
Oklahoma
Not available
No comparable published observation for this period; excluded from rank.
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Published charges describe prices before aid. Costs and outcomes require their own definitions and populations.
Maryland · 2022–23$10,041
Maryland rank#23among all 50 states
U.S. benchmark$9,750Same measure and period when published
#1 is the highest value. Ties share a rank and leave gaps. D.C. and territories are excluded. Rank describes the measured value; it is not an overall score of the state.
Public four-year in-state tuition and fees
Average published annual charges at degree-granting postsecondary institutions in the state.
2022–23 academic year, current dollars. Tuition averages are weighted by undergraduate enrollment; room and board use the NCES reporting universe. Charges exclude aid and do not equal a typical student’s net cost.
Compare states on the graph
Hover or focus a bar to inspect its value and rank. Use the up and down arrows, Home or End to explore states. Click, tap or press Enter to keep a state selected. Maryland stays highlighted. Values use the same measure and period.
Explore the map: hover or focus a state to inspect it, then click or tap to select it. Arrow keys move between states alphabetically. Maryland has a dark outline.
Lower value · $4.54KHigher value · $17.6KStriped: unavailable
Color shows this measure’s value, not an overall state score. Select a state on the map, graph or dropdown to read its value, rank and comparison limits below.
Maryland · $10,0412022–23 · Rank #23 of 50, highest firstSelected state
50 states shown · scroll to explore every state. Missing values have no bar and are excluded from ranks. Bars start at zero; #1 means the highest value.
Compare Maryland with every state · 50 ranked
Public four-year in-state tuition and fees · 2022–23 · highest value ranked #1
Rank
State
Value
Comparison notes
#1
Vermont
$17,600
—
#2
New Hampshire
$17,019
—
#3
Pennsylvania
$16,217
—
#4
Connecticut
$15,763
—
#5
New Jersey
$15,265
—
#6
Illinois
$14,921
—
#7
Virginia
$14,825
—
#8
Rhode Island
$14,744
—
#9
Michigan
$14,718
—
#10
Massachusetts
$14,345
—
#11
Minnesota
$12,873
—
#12
South Carolina
$12,604
—
#13
Oregon
$12,424
—
#14
Delaware
$11,922
—
#15
Arizona
$11,768
—
#16
Kentucky
$11,299
—
#17
Alabama
$11,081
—
#18
Ohio
$10,922
—
#19
Maine
$10,813
—
#20
Hawaii
$10,484
—
#21
Tennessee
$10,437
—
#22
Iowa
$10,121
—
#23
Maryland · your comparison
$10,041
—
#24
Missouri
$9,926
—
#25
Indiana
$9,886
—
#26
Louisiana
$9,843
—
#27
Colorado
$9,798
—
#28
North Dakota
$9,728
—
#29
Kansas
$9,274
—
#30
Mississippi
$9,120
—
#31
South Dakota
$9,079
—
#32
Wisconsin
$8,974
—
#33
Arkansas
$8,879
—
#34
Nebraska
$8,862
—
#35
West Virginia
$8,715
—
#36
California
$8,637
—
#37
New York
$8,575
—
#38
Oklahoma
$8,519
—
#39
Alaska
$8,291
—
#40
Texas
$8,195
—
#41
Washington
$8,006
—
#42
Idaho
$7,640
—
#43
New Mexico
$7,526
—
#44
North Carolina
$7,327
—
#45
Montana
$7,299
—
#46
Utah
$7,215
—
#47
Georgia
$7,075
—
#48
Nevada
$6,723
—
#49
Wyoming
$5,100
—
#50
Florida
$4,540
—
All 50 states are listed, including states without a comparable observation. Ranks use stored source precision; displayed values may round to the same number.
Explore current officeholders and explicitly reviewed historical executive officials, labeled at the time of their actions. Timeline dates, action type, status and search also filter this list. Read any record’s summary, latest recorded status and official evidence below, or open it beside the timeline.
119 of 119 reviewed Maryland actions · newest first
Jul 7, 2026 · OAG 2026-07-07 · Joined comments opposing expanded information requirements on the USCIS change-of-address form for noncitizens. · Reported actionMaryland agencies · OAG 2026-07-07
Joined comments opposing expanded information requirements on the USCIS change-of-address form for noncitizens.
Jul 7, 2026 · Reported action
Attorney General Anthony G. Brown · Submitted comments
FactVote reviewed summary
Joined comments opposing expanded information requirements on the USCIS change-of-address form for noncitizens.
Reported in an official release on 2026-07-07. Submitted comments. This is the reporting date; a filing or order may precede it. Litigation, comments, and guidance do not themselves enact legislation or establish final liability.
Why this record is included
Foreign-born residents include naturalized citizens and lawfully and unlawfully present noncitizens. A provision about a particular immigration status concerns only a subset of that population; it does not change a person’s birthplace. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Maryland evidence context: Residents who are foreign-born. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Media Contacts[email protected]410-576-7009BALTIMORE, MD – Attorney General Anthony G. Brown joined a multistate coalition in opposing the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) proposed revisions to the AR-11 Change of Address form, which would transform a straightforward, longstanding, limited administrative form into an onerous and expansive information collection exercise likely to require assistance from an immigration practitioner. In May, DHS proposed to significantly revise the form, which previously only required an individual’s physical address and basic biographic information such as name, date of birth, and registration number, to now require the detailed disclosure of employment, education, and public benefit use information. The stated purposes for this information collection are vague, with DHS citing the enforcement of immigration laws, including the public charge ground for deportation rule, and the enforcement of the Personal Responsibility & Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA), a law that restricts the eligibility for certain public benefits. In the comment letter, Attorney General Brown and the coalition strenuously object to and request the withdrawal of the proposal to change the AR-11 form because the proposed revisions and the stated purposes of the information collection are unlawful and inappropriate, and these changes will negatively impact the states by deterring lawful participation in public benefit programs, including by children who are U.S. citizens, and increasing the states’ administrative burdens. Reports show there are approximately 70,000 people in Maryland awaiting an asylum decision, 12,500 DACA recipients, almost 50,000 refugees, and 27,000 people with Temporary Protected Status living in Maryland. The proposal will have a significant effect on Maryland families and children. Additionally, nearly half a million U.S. citizen children in Maryland live with one foreign born parent, many of whom are asylum seekers, according to the American Immigration Council. The new form will place a burden on many Marylanders, who
Inspect this action on the timeline ↑May 26, 2026 · HB 849 · HB 849 — Child Care Scholarship Program enrollment and waitlist · Signed by governorGovernor · HB 849
HB 849 — Child Care Scholarship Program enrollment and waitlist
May 26, 2026 · Signed by governor
Wes Moore · Signed
Reviewed topic context
HB 849 specified enrollment-freeze exceptions for certain cash-assistance and Supplemental Security Income recipients, siblings of enrolled children and homeless children. It required an eligible-applicant waitlist with priorities and a review of job-training eligibility. The enacted exceptions do not include all newly unemployed people or all furloughed government workers; those proposed provisions were removed. The act does not lift an enrollment freeze or guarantee a funded award to every applicant.
Signed on 2026-05-26. Approved May 26, 2026. The chapter specifies July 1, 2026 for effectiveness contingent on chapter 595 taking effect. The job-training eligibility report is due December 15, 2026. The enacted exceptions do not include all newly unemployed people or all furloughed government workers; those proposed provisions were removed. The act does not lift an enrollment freeze or guarantee a funded award to every applicant.
Why this record is included
HB 849 specified enrollment-freeze exceptions for certain cash-assistance and Supplemental Security Income recipients, siblings of enrolled children and homeless children. It required an eligible-applicant waitlist with priorities and a review of job-training eligibility. The enacted exceptions do not include all newly unemployed people or all furloughed government workers; those proposed provisions were removed. The act does not lift an enrollment freeze or guarantee a funded award to every applicant. This topic relationship does not establish an effect on a state statistic.
Retained Maryland evidence context: education · reviewed policy-topic context. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Approved by the Governor - Chapter 594
Child Care Scholarship Program - Freeze in Enrollment - Exceptions and Waitlist
Approved by the Governor, May 26, 2026.
HB 525 required county boards to adopt policies prohibiting student use of personal electronic communication devices during the academic day, with storage requirements and specified disability, health, translation and approved caregiving exceptions. Suspension or expulsion cannot rest solely on a policy violation. The act requires local policies by the 2027–28 school year and excludes school-issued instructional devices and specified schools. It does not establish that the policies were already implemented at approval or that learning outcomes improved.
Signed on 2026-05-26. Approved May 26, 2026; the act specifies July 1, 2026 for effectiveness. The 2027–28 school-year policy deadline and later reporting dates are separate. The act requires local policies by the 2027–28 school year and excludes school-issued instructional devices and specified schools. It does not establish that the policies were already implemented at approval or that learning outcomes improved.
Why this record is included
HB 525 required county boards to adopt policies prohibiting student use of personal electronic communication devices during the academic day, with storage requirements and specified disability, health, translation and approved caregiving exceptions. Suspension or expulsion cannot rest solely on a policy violation. The act requires local policies by the 2027–28 school year and excludes school-issued instructional devices and specified schools. It does not establish that the policies were already implemented at approval or that learning outcomes improved. This topic relationship does not establish an effect on a state statistic.
Retained Maryland evidence context: education · reviewed policy-topic context. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Approved by the Governor - Chapter 596
County Boards of Education - Student Electronic Communication Device Use Policy - Establishment (Joanne C. Benson Maryland Phone-Free Schools Act)
Approved by the Governor, May 26, 2026.
Inspect this action on the timeline ↑May 12, 2026 · SB 215 · Veterans and Uniformed Services - Maryland Veterans Trust Fund and Application of Laws · EnactedMaryland Legislature · SB 215
Veterans and Uniformed Services - Maryland Veterans Trust Fund and Application of Laws
May 12, 2026 · Enacted
Sen. Bryan W. Simonaire · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Extends the expedited tenant-holding-over repossession process to qualifying active members of the Public Health Service and NOAA, or their spouses, when the landlord meets the relocation, intended occupancy and documentation requirements.
2026-05-12: Approved by the Governor - Chapter 494. This records the legislative disposition; later implementation or court decisions may differ.
Why this record is included
This provision expands qualifying landlords’ access to an expedited repossession process. It concerns tenancy and possession, not a new rent subsidy or tenant protection. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Maryland evidence context: Median gross rent. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
SB 215 Department of Legislative Services Maryland General Assembly 2026 Session FISCAL AND POLICY NOTE Third Reader Senate Bill 215 (Senator Simonaire) Education, Energy, and the Environment and Judicial Proceedings Government, Labor, and Elections and Judiciary Veterans and Uniformed Services - Maryland Veterans Trust Fund and Application of Laws This bill generally extends applicability of certain provisions related to local government personnel, trout stamps, and landlord remedies (under tenant holding over actions) to definitively include all members of the uniformed services. In addition to other clarifying and conforming changes, the bill also relocates the existing definition of a “military protection order” to the State Government Article. Fiscal Summary State Effect: Special fund revenues may decrease minimally (likely by less than $5,000 annually) due to additional individuals qualifying for an exemption from trout stamps, as discussed below. The bill is otherwise not anticipated to materially impact State finances or operations. Local Effect: None. Small Business Effect: None. Analysis Bill Summary/Current Law: The bill alters several provisions of State law that generally reference military service. In some instances, the bill’s changes are clarifying or conforming changes only; in other instances, provisions are expanded to apply more broadly.
SB 215/ Page 2 Trout Stamps: For example, any person age 16 or older must generally secure an angler’s license to fish in the nontidal waters of the State, as specified in statute. The Department of Natural Resources (DNR) must adopt regulations to establish fishing areas where a trout stamp is required in addition to an angler’s license. However, certain individuals are exempt from requiring a trout stamp, including any resident serving in the armed forces of the United States while on leave in the State, during the resident’s leave period, if, while angling, the resident possesses a copy of the resident’s official leave order. The bill repeals the reference to armed forces and replaces it with uniformed services , thereby extending applicability to members of the Public Health Service (PHS) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). Expedited Process in Tenant Holding Over Actions: Similarly, certain provisions in the Real Property Article establish specific requirements in tenant holding over actions if the landlord or the landlord’s spouse (1) is on active duty with the United States military; (2) has relocated to the State as a direct result of being on active duty; (3) intends to occupy the property that is the subject of the complaint following the entry of the judgment; and (4) submits supporting documentation. In applicable actions, the District Court must order in the summons for the tenant (or assignee or subtenant) to appear before the court no later than 45 days after the landlord makes a complaint to repossess the property. If the sheriff does not serve the summons within 10 days after issuance, the summons may be served by a private process server. The bill generally repeals references to military , instead substituting active service member ; accordingly, those in active service of PHS and NOAA are definitively included. Under the applicable definition, an active service member is an individual who is an active-duty member of the uniformed services or serving in a reserve component of the uniformed services on active-duty orders. Eligibility for Credit Under Selection Test – Local Governments: If a county or municipality uses a selection test for the hiring or appointment of employees, the county or municipality may adopt a local law that allows for the application of a credit of 10 points, or its equivalent, on a selection test for an eligible spouse, an eligible veteran, the spouse of an eligible veteran who has a service-connected disability, or the surviving spouse of a deceased eligible veteran. However, an otherwise eligible veteran who is convicted of a crime after being discharged from or completing military service is ineligible for a credit. The bill replaces the reference to military with uniformed services . Military Protection Order: A “military protection order” means a protection order issued in accordance with 10 U.S.C. § 1567 by a commanding officer against a person in the officer’s command in (1) any branch of the uniformed services; (2) the Maryland National Guard; or (3) the national guard of any other state. (The definition is unchanged under the bill.)
SB 215/ Page 3 Other Provisions: In 2025, Maryland enacted several pieces of legislation establishing uniform definitions of various military‐related terms and expanding certain benefits more broadly to additional individuals based on military service. The bill also alters additional provisions, which generally conform and clarify existing provisions to the changes made in 2025. State Revenues: According to DNR, approximately 2,200 additional State residents may qualify for a trout stamp exemption under the bill. Based on an assumption that approximately 10% of those individuals may acquire an angler’s license and fish for trout, special fund revenues may decrease from trout stamps by up to $4,400 on an annual basis. Additional Information Recent Prior Introductions: Similar legislation has not been introduced within the last three years. Designated Cross File: None. Information Source(s): Maryland Municipal League; Judiciary (Administrative Office of the Courts); Department of Natural Resources; Maryland Department of Transportation; Department of Veterans and Military Families; Military Department; Department of Legislative Services Fiscal Note History: First Reader - February 12, 2026 Third Reader - March 13, 2026 jg/jkb Analysis by: Amanda L. Douglas Direct Inquiries to: (410) 946-5510 (301) 970-5510
Inspect this action on the timeline ↑May 12, 2026 · SB 215 · SB 215 — Veterans and Uniformed Services - Maryland Veterans Trust Fund and Application of Laws · SignedGovernor · SB 215
SB 215 — Veterans and Uniformed Services - Maryland Veterans Trust Fund and Application of Laws
May 12, 2026 · Signed
Gov. Wes Moore · Signed
FactVote reviewed summary
Signed SB 215. Extends the expedited tenant-holding-over repossession process to qualifying active members of the Public Health Service and NOAA, or their spouses, when the landlord meets the relocation, intended occupancy and documentation requirements.
Signed on 2026-05-12. Approved by the Governor - Chapter 494. This records the governor’s action and does not establish current enforceability.
Why this record is included
This provision expands qualifying landlords’ access to an expedited repossession process. It concerns tenancy and possession, not a new rent subsidy or tenant protection. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Maryland evidence context: Median gross rent. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
SB 215 Department of Legislative Services Maryland General Assembly 2026 Session FISCAL AND POLICY NOTE Third Reader Senate Bill 215 (Senator Simonaire) Education, Energy, and the Environment and Judicial Proceedings Government, Labor, and Elections and Judiciary Veterans and Uniformed Services - Maryland Veterans Trust Fund and Application of Laws This bill generally extends applicability of certain provisions related to local government personnel, trout stamps, and landlord remedies (under tenant holding over actions) to definitively include all members of the uniformed services. In addition to other clarifying and conforming changes, the bill also relocates the existing definition of a “military protection order” to the State Government Article. Fiscal Summary State Effect: Special fund revenues may decrease minimally (likely by less than $5,000 annually) due to additional individuals qualifying for an exemption from trout stamps, as discussed below. The bill is otherwise not anticipated to materially impact State finances or operations. Local Effect: None. Small Business Effect: None. Analysis Bill Summary/Current Law: The bill alters several provisions of State law that generally reference military service. In some instances, the bill’s changes are clarifying or conforming changes only; in other instances, provisions are expanded to apply more broadly.
SB 215/ Page 2 Trout Stamps: For example, any person age 16 or older must generally secure an angler’s license to fish in the nontidal waters of the State, as specified in statute. The Department of Natural Resources (DNR) must adopt regulations to establish fishing areas where a trout stamp is required in addition to an angler’s license. However, certain individuals are exempt from requiring a trout stamp, including any resident serving in the armed forces of the United States while on leave in the State, during the resident’s leave period, if, while angling, the resident possesses a copy of the resident’s official leave order. The bill repeals the reference to armed forces and replaces it with uniformed services , thereby extending applicability to members of the Public Health Service (PHS) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). Expedited Process in Tenant Holding Over Actions: Similarly, certain provisions in the Real Property Article establish specific requirements in tenant holding over actions if the landlord or the landlord’s spouse (1) is on active duty with the United States military; (2) has relocated to the State as a direct result of being on active duty; (3) intends to occupy the property that is the subject of the complaint following the entry of the judgment; and (4) submits supporting documentation. In applicable actions, the District Court must order in the summons for the tenant (or assignee or subtenant) to appear before the court no later than 45 days after the landlord makes a complaint to repossess the property. If the sheriff does not serve the summons within 10 days after issuance, the summons may be served by a private process server. The bill generally repeals references to military , instead substituting active service member ; accordingly, those in active service of PHS and NOAA are definitively included. Under the applicable definition, an active service member is an individual who is an active-duty member of the uniformed services or serving in a reserve component of the uniformed services on active-duty orders. Eligibility for Credit Under Selection Test – Local Governments: If a county or municipality uses a selection test for the hiring or appointment of employees, the county or municipality may adopt a local law that allows for the application of a credit of 10 points, or its equivalent, on a selection test for an eligible spouse, an eligible veteran, the spouse of an eligible veteran who has a service-connected disability, or the surviving spouse of a deceased eligible veteran. However, an otherwise eligible veteran who is convicted of a crime after being discharged from or completing military service is ineligible for a credit. The bill replaces the reference to military with uniformed services . Military Protection Order: A “military protection order” means a protection order issued in accordance with 10 U.S.C. § 1567 by a commanding officer against a person in the officer’s command in (1) any branch of the uniformed services; (2) the Maryland National Guard; or (3) the national guard of any other state. (The definition is unchanged under the bill.)
SB 215/ Page 3 Other Provisions: In 2025, Maryland enacted several pieces of legislation establishing uniform definitions of various military‐related terms and expanding certain benefits more broadly to additional individuals based on military service. The bill also alters additional provisions, which generally conform and clarify existing provisions to the changes made in 2025. State Revenues: According to DNR, approximately 2,200 additional State residents may qualify for a trout stamp exemption under the bill. Based on an assumption that approximately 10% of those individuals may acquire an angler’s license and fish for trout, special fund revenues may decrease from trout stamps by up to $4,400 on an annual basis. Additional Information Recent Prior Introductions: Similar legislation has not been introduced within the last three years. Designated Cross File: None. Information Source(s): Maryland Municipal League; Judiciary (Administrative Office of the Courts); Department of Natural Resources; Maryland Department of Transportation; Department of Veterans and Military Families; Military Department; Department of Legislative Services Fiscal Note History: First Reader - February 12, 2026 Third Reader - March 13, 2026 jg/jkb Analysis by: Amanda L. Douglas Direct Inquiries to: (410) 946-5510 (301) 970-5510
SB 869 established customized workforce training for qualifying out-of-state businesses negotiating a Maryland location, delivered with no more than two community-college partners. Agreements must specify full-time job and salary metrics and reimbursement if those metrics are missed. This is a targeted business-attraction pilot, not a universal training entitlement. The act does not establish jobs created, completed training or economic growth.
Signed on 2026-05-12. Approved May 12, 2026. The act specifies October 1, 2026 for effectiveness, a December 31, 2028 report and termination after September 30, 2029 unless later law changes it. This is a targeted business-attraction pilot, not a universal training entitlement. The act does not establish jobs created, completed training or economic growth.
Why this record is included
SB 869 established customized workforce training for qualifying out-of-state businesses negotiating a Maryland location, delivered with no more than two community-college partners. Agreements must specify full-time job and salary metrics and reimbursement if those metrics are missed. This is a targeted business-attraction pilot, not a universal training entitlement. The act does not establish jobs created, completed training or economic growth. This topic relationship does not establish an effect on a state statistic.
Retained Maryland evidence context: unemployment-rate · reviewed policy-topic context. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Approved by the Governor - Chapter 535
Economic Development - Maryland Workforce Launch Pilot Program - Establishment
Approved by the Governor, May 12, 2026.
Records come from published fact relationships or reviewed topic records with official supporting evidence and verified Maryland officeholder attribution. Historical executive officials require evidence tied to the action date and are excluded from incumbent proposals. Inclusion follows an explicit topic review, a related state fact, or the action’s title and supporting evidence. Explicit topic reviews take priority; repeated actions use the most recent explicit review for this topic. Duplicate actions attached to several facts appear once. This topic match is not a new finding that an action caused a result, and the reviewed collection is selective. Collection reviewed Oct 5, 2026.
What candidates are saying
Explore statements about schools, learning, college costs and educational attainment from FactVote’s Maryland candidate profiles. Compare candidates within each recorded race, with each person’s matching statements kept together. These are candidate and campaign statements, not verified outcomes.
29 statements from 12 candidates
2026 Maryland Comptroller — General Election
1 candidate with matching statements · 3 statements
View 2 more statements from Brooke Elizabeth Lierman
Schools & education
Through our revenue collection operations, we ensure we are engaging in proactive outreach to all those who need support and closing the tax gap that exists so we can fund our state priorities, including public education and the transition to clean energy.
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Education, child care, and workforce training
Candidate campaign source
Through our revenue collection operations, we ensure we are engaging in proactive outreach to all those who need support and closing the tax gap that exists so we can fund our state priorities, including public education and the transition to clean energy.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 16, 2026
At the same time, we will be putting forward bold policy proposals that get at the heart of the issues facing Maryland: the need for a solidarity economy, the climate and environmental crises, high-quality public education, healthcare and housing as human rights, reliable public transit, divestment …
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Health care
Candidate campaign source
At the same time, we will be putting forward bold policy proposals that get at the heart of the issues facing Maryland: the need for a solidarity economy, the climate and environmental crises, high-quality public education, healthcare and housing as human rights, reliable public transit, divestment from war and genocide, and more.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
A Dan Cox administration will prioritize ensuring that our schools are fully funded, that our teachers have the resources they need, and that every dollar is going straight to the classrooms and our children's education. Maryland children will be given an equal opportunity to excel and be named amon…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Education, child care, and workforce training
Candidate campaign source
A Dan Cox administration will prioritize ensuring that our schools are fully funded, that our teachers have the resources they need, and that every dollar is going straight to the classrooms and our children's education. Maryland children will be given an equal opportunity to excel and be named among the best students in the nation.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
Dan Cox is a lifelong Marylander, husband, father, grandfather, and small-business owner who has dedicated his career to serving the people of our state. Raised with a deep respect for faith, family, and hard work, Dan understands the challenges Maryland families face — from rising costs to concerns…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Education, child care, and workforce training
Candidate campaign source
Dan Cox is a lifelong Marylander, husband, father, grandfather, and small-business owner who has dedicated his career to serving the people of our state. Raised with a deep respect for faith, family, and hard work, Dan understands the challenges Maryland families face — from rising costs to concerns about safety, education, and opportunity. His commitment to public service is rooted in a simple belief: government should be accountable, communities should be empowered, and every Marylander deserves the freedom to build a better future.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
We are dedicated to practicing lean, responsible spending, and maintaining full transparency. There will be no more “pet projects” and no more endless bridge studies. Urgent needs such as infrastructure and roads will be expedited and not delayed. Wes Moore is passing to the counties' outrageous cos…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Education, child care, and workforce training
Candidate campaign source
We are dedicated to practicing lean, responsible spending, and maintaining full transparency. There will be no more “pet projects” and no more endless bridge studies. Urgent needs such as infrastructure and roads will be expedited and not delayed. Wes Moore is passing to the counties' outrageous cost increases and mandates that are necessitating increased fiscal burdens and tax considerations just to meet the needs of the growing costs of education and infrastructure. This will change under a Dan Cox administration: counties will immediately receive a reprieve from increased state mandates and costs, and our State budget will once again prioritize funding for County needs.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
Dan Cox is a lifelong Marylander, husband, father, grandfather, and small‑business owner who has dedicated his career to serving the people of our state. Raised with a deep respect for faith, family, and hard work, Dan understands the challenges Maryland families face — from rising costs to concerns…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Education, child care, and workforce training
Candidate campaign source
Dan Cox is a lifelong Marylander, husband, father, grandfather, and small‑business owner who has dedicated his career to serving the people of our state. Raised with a deep respect for faith, family, and hard work, Dan understands the challenges Maryland families face — from rising costs to concerns about safety, education, and opportunity. His commitment to public service is rooted in a simple belief: government should be accountable, communities should be empowered, and every Marylander deserves the freedom to build a better future.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
As federal leaders prioritize billionaires and large corporations, Moore continues to stand with and fight for the middle class. Moore is driven by the same purpose that brought him into office in the first place: to make Maryland’s public schools the best in America, to end childhood poverty once a…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Education, child care, and workforce training
Candidate campaign source
As federal leaders prioritize billionaires and large corporations, Moore continues to stand with and fight for the middle class. Moore is driven by the same purpose that brought him into office in the first place: to make Maryland’s public schools the best in America, to end childhood poverty once and for all, and to ensure more Marylanders can afford to live, work, and thrive in the state they love.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 16, 2026
Improve health care access and affordability in MD-1. Reverse changes to professional classifications that target prospective nurses and force them to utilize shady private student lenders. Incentivize health care providers to work and live in MD-1 through tax credits and student debt relief. Fund o…
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Health care
Candidate campaign source
Improve health care access and affordability in MD-1. Reverse changes to professional classifications that target prospective nurses and force them to utilize shady private student lenders. Incentivize health care providers to work and live in MD-1 through tax credits and student debt relief. Fund our rural hospitals and community clinics.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
Eight-term Rep. Andy Harris works to take away our individual freedoms on a daily basis. He advocates for troops on the streets of American cities, withholds money from our county schools, and seeks to police women’s bodies. I will protect your rights, the rights of our neighbors, and families.
Read exact statement & source
Source topic or question: Civil rights and individual freedom
Candidate campaign source
Eight-term Rep. Andy Harris works to take away our individual freedoms on a daily basis. He advocates for troops on the streets of American cities, withholds money from our county schools, and seeks to police women’s bodies. I will protect your rights, the rights of our neighbors, and families.
Statement date not recorded · Profile reviewed Sep 15, 2026
This section matches specific schools, learning, college costs and educational attainment terms in retained, attributed source text from published Maryland candidate profiles. A profile heading or biography alone does not qualify. The Florida geography is fixed; saved state preferences cannot change these results. A mention can concern a community or group rather than Florida’s statewide measure.
Matching is automatic and does not establish a candidate’s stance, the accuracy of a claim, or an effect on the measured result. Results are grouped by recorded race, then by candidate name. Within each candidate, the matching issue mentions appear first. Only candidates with matching retained statements are shown; this is not a complete race roster. Repeated identical text for the same candidate is shown once. Coverage follows the existing state profiles and is not a complete record of all candidates or everything they have said. Review dates are not statement dates.
Maryland incumbents
What incumbents are proposing
Explore reviewed bills sponsored by current Maryland legislators and Maryland’s congressional delegation, plus retained proposals from Maryland’s governor and agencies. Each record keeps its latest recorded status and official evidence.
90 matching sponsorships or proposals · 53 Maryland incumbents. These filters apply only to this section.
Maryland Violence Intervention and Prevention Program Fund and Advisory Council - Alterations
Feb 7, 2020 · Did not pass
Comptroller Brooke Lierman · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Requiring the Governor to include $10,000,000 in the annual State budget to the Maryland Violence Intervention and Prevention Program Fund; requiring that the appropriation be composed of at least $5,000,000 in general funds; authorizing the Fund to be used for oversight of the Fund, public outreach and education and technical assistance and best practice education for grantees; requiring the Executive Director of the Maryland Violence Intervention and Prevention Advisory Council to oversee certain evaluations; etc.
The measure did not pass in its completed 2020RS session. Final recorded action: 2020-02-07, Hearing 2/25 at 1:00 p.m. (Appropriations).
Why this record is included
The fact counts deaths whose underlying cause is homicide. The provision addresses a defined prevention or measurement mechanism; a general criminal penalty or post-offense benefit alone does not demonstrate homicide prevention. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Maryland evidence context: Homicide deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Requiring the Governor to include $10,000,000 in the annual State budget to the Maryland Violence Intervention and Prevention Program Fund; requiring that the appropriation be composed of at least $5,000,000 in general funds; authorizing the Fund to be used for oversight of the Fund, public outreach and education and technical assistance and best practice education for grantees; requiring the Executive Director of the Maryland Violence Intervention and Prevention Advisory Council to oversee certain evaluations; etc.
1 proposalView proposals from Del. April MillerMaryland Legislature · HB 1077
Education - Career and Technical Education - Workgroup to Study Tiered Stackable Credentials Framework
Feb 16, 2026 · Did not pass
Del. April Miller · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Requiring the State Department of Education and the Career and Technical Education Committee jointly to convene a workgroup to review certain high school graduation-related requirements to study and make recommendations on developing a tiered system of stackable credential pathways for a certain purpose; and requiring the submission of a joint report on the findings and recommendations of the workgroup, by December 31, 2026, including the need for any statutory or regulatory changes.
The measure did not pass in its completed 2026RS session. Final recorded action: 2026-02-16, Hearing 3/10 at 1:00 p.m..
Why this record is included
The fact measures diploma-or-higher attainment among adults age 25 and older. Completion and equivalency programs address a component of attainment; rules for current students concern a potential future component of the adult population. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Maryland evidence context: Adults with at least a high school diploma. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Requiring the State Department of Education and the Career and Technical Education Committee jointly to convene a workgroup to review certain high school graduation-related requirements to study and make recommendations on developing a tiered system of stackable credential pathways for a certain purpose; and requiring the submission of a joint report on the findings and recommendations of the workgroup, by December 31, 2026, including the need for any statutory or regulatory changes.
6 proposalsView proposals from Del. April RoseMaryland Legislature · HB 1264
Public Schools - Mathematics Credit - College Preparatory Computer Science or Computer Programming Course
Mar 5, 2025 · Did not pass
Del. April Rose · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Authorizing a student who is enrolled at a public high school to satisfy part of a graduation requirement to earn mathematics credits by completing a credit in a certain college preparatory computer science or computer programming course if enrolled in the course concurrently with or after completing Algebra II; and requiring a county board of education to certify to the State Department of Education that a certain college preparatory course may count toward the mathematics graduation requirement.
The measure did not pass in its completed 2025RS session. Final recorded action: 2025-03-05, Hearing 3/05 at 1:15 p.m..
Why this record is included
The fact measures diploma-or-higher attainment among adults age 25 and older. Completion and equivalency programs address a component of attainment; rules for current students concern a potential future component of the adult population. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Maryland evidence context: Adults with at least a high school diploma. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Authorizing a student who is enrolled at a public high school to satisfy part of a graduation requirement to earn mathematics credits by completing a credit in a certain college preparatory computer science or computer programming course if enrolled in the course concurrently with or after completing Algebra II; and requiring a county board of education to certify to the State Department of Education that a certain college preparatory course may count toward the mathematics graduation requirement.
Public Schools - Mathematics Credit - College Preparatory Computer Science or Computer Programming Course
Mar 19, 2024 · Did not pass
Del. April Rose · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Authorizing a student who is enrolled at a public high school to satisfy part of a graduation requirement to earn credits in mathematics by completing a credit in an advanced placement computer science or computer programming course or an equally rigorous college preparatory computer science or programming course if enrolled in the course concurrently with or after completing Algebra II; and requiring a county board of education to make a certain certification that certain selected courses may count toward graduation.
The measure did not pass in its completed 2024RS session. Final recorded action: 2024-03-19, Hearing 4/02 at 1:00 p.m..
Why this record is included
The fact measures diploma-or-higher attainment among adults age 25 and older. Completion and equivalency programs address a component of attainment; rules for current students concern a potential future component of the adult population. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Maryland evidence context: Adults with at least a high school diploma. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Authorizing a student who is enrolled at a public high school to satisfy part of a graduation requirement to earn credits in mathematics by completing a credit in an advanced placement computer science or computer programming course or an equally rigorous college preparatory computer science or programming course if enrolled in the course concurrently with or after completing Algebra II; and requiring a county board of education to make a certain certification that certain selected courses may count toward graduation.
Public Schools - Mathematics Credit - College Preparatory Computer Science or Computer Programming Course
Feb 10, 2023 · Did not pass
Del. April Rose · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Authorizing a student who is enrolled at a public high school to satisfy a graduation requirement to earn credits in mathematics by completing a credit in a certain college preparatory computer science or computer programming course if enrolled in the course concurrently with or after completing Algebra II; and requiring a county board of education to make a certification that a college preparatory computer science or computer programming course may count toward the mathematics graduation requirement.
The measure did not pass in its completed 2023RS session. Final recorded action: 2023-02-10, Hearing 3/01 at 1:00 p.m..
Why this record is included
The fact measures diploma-or-higher attainment among adults age 25 and older. Completion and equivalency programs address a component of attainment; rules for current students concern a potential future component of the adult population. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Maryland evidence context: Adults with at least a high school diploma. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Authorizing a student who is enrolled at a public high school to satisfy a graduation requirement to earn credits in mathematics by completing a credit in a certain college preparatory computer science or computer programming course if enrolled in the course concurrently with or after completing Algebra II; and requiring a county board of education to make a certification that a college preparatory computer science or computer programming course may count toward the mathematics graduation requirement.
Public Schools - Mathematics Credit - College Preparatory Computer Science or Computer Programming Course
Apr 5, 2022 · Did not pass
Del. April Rose · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Authorizing a student who is enrolled at a public high school to satisfy a graduation requirement to earn credits in mathematics by completing a credit in a certain college preparatory computer science or computer programming course if enrolled in the course concurrently with or after completing Algebra II; and requiring a county board of education to make a certification that a college preparatory computer science or computer programming course may count toward the mathematics graduation requirement.
The measure did not pass in its completed 2022RS session. Final recorded action: 2022-04-05, Hearing 4/05 at 1:00 p.m..
Why this record is included
The fact measures diploma-or-higher attainment among adults age 25 and older. Completion and equivalency programs address a component of attainment; rules for current students concern a potential future component of the adult population. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Maryland evidence context: Adults with at least a high school diploma. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Authorizing a student who is enrolled at a public high school to satisfy a graduation requirement to earn credits in mathematics by completing a credit in a certain college preparatory computer science or computer programming course if enrolled in the course concurrently with or after completing Algebra II; and requiring a county board of education to make a certification that a college preparatory computer science or computer programming course may count toward the mathematics graduation requirement.
Public Schools - Mathematics Credit - College Preparatory Computer Science or Computer Programming Course
Jan 29, 2021 · Did not pass
Del. April Rose · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Authorizing a student who is enrolled at a public high school to satisfy a certain graduation requirement to earn credits in mathematics by completing a credit in a certain college preparatory computer science or computer programming course under certain circumstances; and requiring a county board to certify to the State Department of Education that the computer science or computer programming course may count toward the mathematics graduation requirement.
The measure did not pass in its completed 2021RS session. Final recorded action: 2021-01-29, Hearing 2/12 at 1:30 p.m..
Why this record is included
The fact measures diploma-or-higher attainment among adults age 25 and older. Completion and equivalency programs address a component of attainment; rules for current students concern a potential future component of the adult population. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Maryland evidence context: Adults with at least a high school diploma. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Authorizing a student who is enrolled at a public high school to satisfy a certain graduation requirement to earn credits in mathematics by completing a credit in a certain college preparatory computer science or computer programming course under certain circumstances; and requiring a county board to certify to the State Department of Education that the computer science or computer programming course may count toward the mathematics graduation requirement.
Public Schools – Mathematics Credit – College Preparatory Computer Science or Computer Programming Course
Mar 17, 2020 · Did not pass
Del. April Rose · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Authorizing a student who is enrolled at a public high school to satisfy a certain requirement to earn credits in mathematics by completing a credit in a certain college preparatory computer science or computer programming course selected by the county board; and requiring the county board to certify to the State Department of Education that the computer science or computer programming course may count toward the mathematics graduation requirement.
The measure did not pass in its completed 2020RS session. Final recorded action: 2020-03-17, Referred Education, Health, and Environmental Affairs.
Why this record is included
The fact measures diploma-or-higher attainment among adults age 25 and older. Completion and equivalency programs address a component of attainment; rules for current students concern a potential future component of the adult population. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Maryland evidence context: Adults with at least a high school diploma. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Authorizing a student who is enrolled at a public high school to satisfy a certain requirement to earn credits in mathematics by completing a credit in a certain college preparatory computer science or computer programming course selected by the county board; and requiring the county board to certify to the State Department of Education that the computer science or computer programming course may count toward the mathematics graduation requirement.
2 proposalsView proposals from Del. Bernice Mireku-NorthMaryland Legislature · HB 387
Comprehensive Community Safety Funding Act
Jan 31, 2025 · Did not pass
Del. Bernice Mireku-North · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Would impose an 11% excise tax on specified firearm dealers’ firearm-sale receipts and distribute revenue to designated funds, including the Violence Intervention and Prevention Fund.
The measure did not pass in its completed 2025RS session. Final recorded action: 2025-01-31, Hearing 2/13 at 1:00 p.m..
Why this record is included
The relationship concerns proposed violence-prevention funding. The tax proposal did not become law and does not establish fewer firearm deaths. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Maryland evidence context: Firearm deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
HB 387 Department of Legislative Services Maryland General Assembly 2025 Session FISCAL AND POLICY NOTE First Reader House Bill 387 (Delegate Mireku - North, et al. ) Ways and Means Comprehensive Community Safety Funding Act This bill establishes an 11% firearm excise tax on the gross receipts of a federally licensed firearms dealer derived from (1) the retail sale of firearms in the State and (2) the retail sale of firearms to State residents from a federally licensed firearms dealer that is located outside the State. The bill requires specified distributions of the revenue from the excise tax. The bill also provides for the filing of specified tax returns and for the administration of the tax by the Comptroller. The bill takes effect July 1, 2027. Fiscal Summary State Effect: Special fund revenues increase by $15.0 million in FY 2028 and by $16.2 million in FY 2030. Special fund expenditures for administrative costs increase by $2.2 million in FY 2028 and by $0.6 million in FY 2030. Future year expenditures reflect annualization and inflation. ($ in millions) FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 SF Revenue $0 $0 $15.0 $15.6 $16.2 SF Expenditure $0 $0 $2.2 $0.6 $0.6 Net Effect $0.0 $0.0 $12.8 $14.9 $15.5 Note: () = decrease; GF = general funds; FF = federal funds; SF = special funds; - = indeterminate increase; (-) = indeterminate decrease Local Effect: None. Small Business Effect: Potential meaningful. Small businesses that sell firearms will be subject to the new excise tax. However, some portion of the cost of the new tax may be passed on to the consumers through increased prices.
HB 387/ Page 2 Analysis Bill Summary: The bill establishes an 11% firearm excise tax on the gross receipts of the sale of firearms in the State by a federally licensed firearms dealer located both within the State and outside the State. The bill specifies the distribution of revenue from the excise tax, administration of the excise tax by the Comptroller, filing of excise tax returns by licensed dealers, and the paying of excise taxes by licensed dealers. The excise tax does not apply to the sale of a firearm to (1) a law enforcement agency; (2) the armed forces of the United States; (3) the National Guard; (4) a law enforcement officer; (5) a retired law enforcement officer; or (6) an individual for the exclusive purpose of competition shooting or match shooting. The excise tax applies to (1) a retail sale made on or after July 1, 2027, by a federally licensed firearms dealer that is a large retailer and (2) a retail sale made by any other federally licensed firearms dealer on or after July 1, 2028. For a federally licensed firearms dealer that is located outside the State, the excise tax only applies if the federally licensed firearms dealer, during the previous calendar year or the current calendar year (1) derives gross revenue from the sale of firearms to residents of the State that exceeds $100,000 or (2) sells firearms to residents of the State for delivery into the State in 200 or more separate transactions. Distribution of the Firearm Excise Tax Revenue Revenue from the firearm excise tax must be distributed equally to the following: the Coordinated Community Supports Partnership Fund; the Maryland Trauma Physician Services Fund; the R Adams Cowley Shock Trauma Center at the University of Maryland Medical System; the Maryland Violence Intervention and Prevention Program Fund; the Survivors of Homicide Victims Grant Program within the G overnor’s Office of Crime Prevention and Policy; and the Center for Firearm Violence Prevention and Intervention within the Maryland Department of Health. The bill specifies that it is the intent of the General Assembly that the excise tax revenue supplement, and not supplant, any other funding for these funds required by law.
HB 387/ Page 3 Firearm Excise Tax Returns A federally licensed firearms dealer must complete, under oath, and file an excise tax return with the Comptroller (1) on or before the 25th day of the month that follows the month in which the person sells any firearms within the boundaries of the State or to residents of the State and (2) if specified by the Comptroller, by regulation, on other dates for each month in which the licensee does not sell any firearms in the State or to residents of the State. A person required to file an excise tax return must file with the return an attachment that states any information required by the Comptroller to determine the gross receipts derived from the sales of firearms in the State or to residents of the State. A person required to file an excise tax return must maintain records of the firearms sold in the State or to residents of the State and the basis for the calculation of the excise tax owed. Payment of Firearm Excise Taxes Each person required to file an excise tax return must pay the firearm excise tax in the manner required by the Comptroller, with the return that covers the period in which the person sold firearms in the State or to residents of the State. If a corporation, other than a nonstock, nonprofit corporation, is required to pay the excise tax, personal liability for the tax and interest and penalties on the tax extends to any officer of the corporation who exercises direct control over its fiscal management. If a limited liability company, or limited liability partnership, including a limited partnership registered as a limited liability limited partnership, is required to pay the excise tax, personal liability for the tax and interest and penalties on the tax extends to any person who exercises direct control over the fiscal management of the limited liability company or limited liability partnership. The Comptroller may require a person subject to the firearms excise tax to post security for the excise tax in the amount that the Comptroller determines. A person who willfully fails to file a required firearm excise tax return is guilty of a misdemeanor and, on conviction, is subject to a fine of up to $5,000 or imprisonment of up to five years or both. Definitions A federally licensed firearms dealer is a person licensed by the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to deal in firearms. Gross receipts are defined as the total amount of the sale or lease or rental price of the retail sale by a person, valued in money, whether received in money or otherwise, without any deduction for (1) the cost of the property sold; (2) the cost of the materials used, labor or
Would impose an 11% excise tax on specified firearm, accessory and ammunition sales and distribute revenue to designated funds, including the Violence Intervention and Prevention Fund.
The measure did not pass in its completed 2024RS session. Final recorded action: 2024-02-02, Hearing 2/22 at 1:00 p.m..
Why this record is included
The relationship concerns proposed violence-prevention funding. The tax proposal did not become law and does not establish fewer firearm deaths. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Maryland evidence context: Firearm deaths. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
HB 935 Department of Legislative Services Maryland General Assembly 2024 Session FISCAL AND POLICY NOTE First Reader House Bill 935 (Delegate Mireku - North, et al. ) Ways and Means Comprehensive Community Safety Funding Act This bill establishes an 11% firearm, firearm accessory, and ammunition (FFAA) excise tax on the gross receipts of a federally licensed firearms dealer derived from the sales of firearms, firearm accessories, and ammunition in the State. The bill requires specified distributions of the revenue from the excise tax. The bill provides for the filing of specified tax returns and for the administration of the tax by the Comptroller. The bill takes effect July 1, 2025. Fiscal Summary State Effect: Special fund revenues increase by approximately $22.4 million in FY 2026 and by $25.0 million in FY 2029. Special fund expenditures for administrative costs increase by $3.7 million in FY 2026 and by $716,500 in FY 2029. Future year expenditures reflect annualization and inflation. ($ in millions) FY 2025 FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 SF Revenue $0 $22.4 $23.2 $24.1 $25.0 SF Expenditure $0 $3.7 $0.7 $0.7 $0.7 Net Effect $0.0 $18.7 $22.6 $23.4 $24.3 Note:() = decrease; GF = general funds; FF = federal funds; SF = special funds; - = indeterminate increase; (-) = indeterminate decrease Local Effect: None. Small Business Effect: Potential meaningful. Small businesses that sell firearms, firearm accessories, and ammunition will be subject to the new excise tax. However, some portion of the cost of the new tax may be passed on to the consumers through increased prices.
HB 935/ Page 2 Analysis Bill Summary: The bill establishes an 11% FFAA excise tax on the gross receipts of the sale of firearms, firearm accessories, and ammunition in the State by a federally licensed firearms dealer. The bill specifies the distribution of revenue from the excise tax, administration of the excise tax by the Comptroller, filing of excise tax returns by licensed dealers, and the paying of excise taxes by licensed dealers. Distribution of the Firearm, Firearm Accessory, and Ammunition Excise Tax Revenue Revenue from the FFAA excise tax must be distributed as follows: 44% to the Maryland Trauma Physician Services Fund; 29% to the R Adams Cowley Shock Trauma Center at the University of Maryland Medical System; 23% to the Violence Intervention and Prevention Program Fund; 2% to the Survivors of Homicide Victims Grant Program within the G overnor’s Office of Crime Prevention and Policy; and 2% to the Center for Firearm Violence Prevention and Intervention within the Maryland Department of Health. The bill specifies that it is the intent of the General Assembly that the excise tax revenue supplement, and not supplant, any other funding for these funds required by law. Firearm, Firearm Accessory, and Ammunition Excise Tax Returns A federally licensed firearms dealer must complete, under oath, and file an FFAA excise tax return with the Comptroller: (1) on or before the 25th day of the month that follows the month in which the person sells any firearms, firearm accessories, or ammunition within the boundaries of the State; and (2) if specified by the Comptroller, by regulation, on other dates for each month in which the licensee does not sell any firearms, firearm accessories, or ammunition in the State. A person required to file an excise tax return must file with the return an attachment that states any information required by the Comptroller to determine the gross receipts derived from the sales of firearms, firearm accessories, and ammunition in the State. A person required to file an excise tax return must maintain records of the firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition sold in the State and the basis for the calculation of the FFAA excise tax owed.
HB 935/ Page 3 Payment of Firearm, Firearm Accessory, and Ammunition Excise Taxes Each person required to file an excise tax return must pay the FFAA excise tax in the manner required by the Comptroller, with the return that covers the period in which the person sold firearms, firearm accessories, or ammunition in the State. If a corporation, other than a nonstock, nonprofit corporation, is required to pay the FFAA excise tax, personal liability for the tax and interest and penalties on the tax extends to any officer of the corporation who exercises direct control over its fiscal management. If a limited liability company, or limited liability partnership, including a limited partnership registered as a limited liability limited partnership, is required to pay the FFAA excise tax, personal liability for the tax and interest and penalties on the tax extends to any person who exercises direct control over the fiscal management of the limited liability company or limited liability partnership. The Comptroller may require a person subject to the FFAA excise tax to post security for the excise tax in the amount that the Comptroller determines. A person who willfully fails to file a required FFAA excise tax return is guilty of a misdemeanor and, on conviction, is subject to a fine up to $5,000 or imprisonment up of to five years or both. Definitions A federally licensed firearms dealer is a person licensed by the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to deal in firearms. A firearm accessory is: (1) a magazine or magazine loader; (2) a firearm scope or optic; (3) a stock; (4) a grip; (5) a handguard; or (6) body armor. Gross receipts are defined as the total amount of the sale or lease or rental price of the retail sale by a person, valued in money, whether received in money or otherwise, without any deduction for: (1) the cost of the property sold; (2) the cost of the materials used, labor or service cost, interest paid, losses, or any other expense; or (3) the cost of transportation of the property. Gross receipts do not include: (1) cash discounts allowed and taken on sales; (2) the sale price of property returned by customers when that amount is refunded in cash or credit unless the customer, in order to obtain the refund, is required to purchase other property at a price greater than the amount charged for the property that is returned; (3) the price received for labor or services used in installing or applying the property sold; and (4) the amount of any tax imposed by the United States, the State, a county, or a municipality on or with respect to retail sales whether imposed on the person or the consumer.
2 proposalsView proposals from Del. Catherine M. ForbesMaryland Legislature · HB 943
State Board of Education - Financial Literacy - Graduation Requirement
Feb 11, 2026 · Did not pass
Del. Catherine M. Forbes · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Requiring the State Board of Education to establish a certain graduation requirement in financial literacy; requiring students, beginning with the 2030 graduating class, to successfully complete a certain personal financial literacy course; and requiring county boards, upon successful completion of the course, to award certain credit to students and to allow students to fulfill certain remaining credit requirements through certain existing courses.
The measure did not pass in its completed 2026RS session. Final recorded action: 2026-02-11, Hearing 2/25 at 1:00 p.m..
Why this record is included
The fact measures diploma-or-higher attainment among adults age 25 and older. Completion and equivalency programs address a component of attainment; rules for current students concern a potential future component of the adult population. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Maryland evidence context: Adults with at least a high school diploma. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Requiring the State Board of Education to establish a certain graduation requirement in financial literacy; requiring students, beginning with the 2030 graduating class, to successfully complete a certain personal financial literacy course; and requiring county boards, upon successful completion of the course, to award certain credit to students and to allow students to fulfill certain remaining credit requirements through certain existing courses.
Requiring each county board of education, beginning in the 2026-2027 school year, to allow successful completion of eligible financial literacy courses to be applied toward fulfillment of the student service hours high school graduation requirement for the number of hours determined by the county board.
The measure did not pass in its completed 2025RS session. Final recorded action: 2025-01-15, Hearing 1/29 at 1:00 p.m..
Why this record is included
The fact measures diploma-or-higher attainment among adults age 25 and older. Completion and equivalency programs address a component of attainment; rules for current students concern a potential future component of the adult population. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Maryland evidence context: Adults with at least a high school diploma. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Requiring each county board of education, beginning in the 2026-2027 school year, to allow successful completion of eligible financial literacy courses to be applied toward fulfillment of the student service hours high school graduation requirement for the number of hours determined by the county board.
1 proposalView proposals from Del. Christopher T. AdamsMaryland Legislature · HB 769
Education - High School Students - Graduation and Attendance Credit for Vocational Training
Feb 21, 2020 · Did not pass
Del. Christopher T. Adams · Sponsored
FactVote reviewed summary
Authorizing a county board of education to award credit to a high school student toward a high school diploma or a postsecondary credential, or both, for one vocational course per semester in a career and technical education program approved by the county board; and authorizing a county board to count toward high school attendance the time a high school student spends during vocational training in a career and technical education program approved by the county board.
The measure did not pass in its completed 2020RS session. Final recorded action: 2020-02-21, Withdrawn by Sponsor.
Why this record is included
The fact measures diploma-or-higher attainment among adults age 25 and older. Completion and equivalency programs address a component of attainment; rules for current students concern a potential future component of the adult population. This relationship does not establish causation. Actions after the fact’s measurement period cannot explain its earlier value.
Retained Maryland evidence context: Adults with at least a high school diploma. This record’s connection to the topic does not establish an effect on the measured result.
Authorizing a county board of education to award credit to a high school student toward a high school diploma or a postsecondary credential, or both, for one vocational course per semester in a career and technical education program approved by the county board; and authorizing a county board to count toward high school attendance the time a high school student spends during vocational training in a career and technical education program approved by the county board.
Only current Maryland officeholders retained in the reviewed collection qualify. Bills require a recorded primary sponsorship; cosponsors and signing officials are excluded from sponsorship counts. An official introducer recorded as acting by request is labeled “Introduced by request”; that procedural role does not establish personal policy endorsement. Governor and agency records qualify when recorded as proposed. A separately verified governor transmittal can also establish an original proposal whose latest status reflects its later outcome. Signing an enacted law alone does not establish a proposal. A record appearing under several facts is counted once per officeholder. A bill with multiple primary sponsors appears under each recorded sponsor.
Enacted bills, adopted resolutions and unsuccessful measures remain visible as proposal history. Passing one chamber is not enactment. These counts do not measure effectiveness or prove that an action changed a Maryland statistic. Collection reviewed Oct 5, 2026.
Sources & methods
Every section retains its primary sources, units, reporting periods and comparison limits. Maps, graphs and tables use the same observation and cohort. All 50 states are listed; D.C. and territories are excluded. Missing and suppressed values remain unavailable and never become zero.
#1 is the highest measured value. Equal source values share a rank and leave gaps (1, 2, 2, 4). Ranks use source precision and are descriptive, not a score of the state. Survey uncertainty and reporting coverage can limit comparisons. Published U.S. benchmarks are used where available; a state average is not substituted.
Maryland snapshots and fiscal sources keep their own dates and accounting scope. National events and federal distribution explainers describe national context. Actions and statements are filtered to Maryland, retain their reviewed evidence, and do not establish that a policy caused a measured change.
Retained state source collections assembled October 5, 2026. Original review and source dates remain visible. Refreshing this page does not refresh an official data release.