Latest action: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Referred to one or more standing committees for review, hearings, and possible markup.
Specific committees not parsed from action data.
The committee may hold hearings, amend the bill, or let it die without action.
Next: Reported
Full chamber floor — Speaker / Majority Leader controls scheduling
Holds AI companies responsible when their systems commit fraud.
The problem
AI systems sometimes make fraudulent decisions or enable fraud. Current laws don't clearly say who is responsible when AI causes fraud damage.
The proposal
Creates legal accountability rules for companies that develop or use AI systems that commit fraud. Sets standards for AI fraud prevention and establishes liability for violations.
The impact
AI companies, financial institutions, and consumers are affected. Companies face legal responsibility; consumers gain fraud protections; institutions need compliance changes.
Gives people a clear way to hold companies accountable when AI causes fraud damage. Consumers could recover losses more easily instead of facing legal confusion about who is responsible.
Companies would be motivated to build safer AI systems and test them carefully. Better fraud detection and prevention would happen faster if companies face consequences.
Provides clear standards for what AI companies must do to prevent fraud. Businesses would know exactly what protections are legally required.
People would trust AI systems more if companies are held accountable. This could increase adoption of beneficial AI technologies safely.
AI companies and financial institutions would spend money building fraud prevention systems. Smaller companies might struggle with expensive compliance requirements more than large ones.
Heavy liability rules might make companies cautious about developing new AI tools. Beneficial AI applications could be delayed or abandoned due to legal risk.
It can be hard to prove that AI caused fraud versus human error or other factors. Courts might struggle with complex cases about who is actually responsible.
Companies would need expensive liability insurance, raising costs for consumers. These expenses could get passed on as higher prices for services.
Generated by AI from the bill text. Not a prediction and not legal or policy advice. The percentage is the model's own rating of each item — self-reported, and not a measure of how accurate it is.
Loading map…
Loading...
0 citizens have already voted
Free · No spam · See how your representatives voted
Be the first to weigh in
Your vote starts the conversation
How citizen engagement works
Citizens vote & comment
Public opinion data is aggregated and updated in real time.
Patterns become visible
Representatives can see constituent sentiment broken down by district.
Your voice on the record
Contact your rep directly — one constituent call can shift a staffer's priority list.
Research shows that constituent contacts — especially calls — are among the most effective ways to influence a legislator's position on active bills.
Individual contributions, grouped by employer · FEC
Where their individual donors work · 2026 cycle
Money from people who work there, not from the company. Not tied to this bill.
Itemized individual contributions via FEC, grouped by the employer each contributor self-reported. Companies and unions cannot contribute to federal candidates from their treasuries, so these totals are money from people who work at an employer — never from the organization itself. They are campaign contributions covering a full election cycle and are not connected to this bill.
Senate LDA lobbying disclosures
Couldn't load lobbying disclosures right now.