Latest action: Referred to the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment.
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
Requires finding safer replacements for PFAS chemicals used in many products.
The problem
PFAS chemicals are widely used but linked to health risks. Finding alternatives requires research and development to protect public health.
The proposal
The bill directs research and development of alternatives to PFAS chemicals in products like firefighting foam, food packaging, and textiles.
The impact
Manufacturers, regulators, and consumers are affected as products change. Health outcomes may improve if alternatives are safer.
PFAS chemicals accumulate in the body and are linked to disease. Replacing them with safer alternatives could protect public health long-term.
Research requirements encourage companies to develop new materials and technologies. This creates business opportunities in green chemistry and advanced manufacturing.
PFAS chemicals contaminate groundwater and persist in the environment. Switching to biodegradable alternatives prevents long-term environmental damage.
Many nations are restricting PFAS use. U.S. action keeps American manufacturers competitive globally.
Finding and testing alternatives is expensive. Manufacturers may pass costs to consumers or struggle with compliance.
Replacement chemicals may have unknown risks or lower performance. Switching too quickly could create new problems.
Factories using PFAS need retooling and worker retraining. Transition period could disrupt production and employment.
Testing and approval processes add time and complexity. Small companies may struggle more than large corporations.
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.
Other bills in this policy area
HR 9394
Civil Preparedness for Agroterrorism Exercise Act of 2026
HR 1342
Stopping Political Discrimination in Disaster Assistance Act
HR 10132
ARTICLE ONE Act
HR 10122
STORM FORTIFIED and Wildfire Prepared Act
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.