Latest action: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
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
Bans asbestos use in the United States to protect public health.
The problem
Asbestos causes serious lung diseases and cancer. It remains legal in some U.S. products despite known health risks.
The proposal
The bill would prohibit the manufacturing, importing, and sale of asbestos-containing products in America.
The impact
Workers in manufacturing face job changes. Companies using asbestos must transition to alternatives. Public health improves through reduced exposure risk.
Asbestos causes mesothelioma, lung cancer, and asbestosis. Banning it stops new exposures and protects workers and families. This saves lives and reduces medical costs.
Over 60 countries have banned asbestos already. U.S. ban brings America in line with international safety practices. This creates consistent standards for trade.
Companies face lawsuits from asbestos-related illnesses. A complete ban could reduce future legal claims. This creates more certainty for business planning.
Companies will invest in safer substitute materials. This drives innovation in insulation, brakes, and other products. New technology can create competitive advantages.
Some U.S. asbestos mining and processing operations would close. Workers in these sectors may lose employment. Transition assistance may be needed.
Replacement materials may be more expensive than asbestos. Companies could pass costs to consumers. Some manufacturers may relocate overseas.
Businesses need time and resources to switch to alternatives. Strict timelines could disrupt supply chains. Some specialized uses may lack good substitutes.
The bill focuses on new products only. Older buildings still contain asbestos insulation and materials. Removal and remediation are separate problems requiring more action.
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
HRES 1606
Expressing support for the designation of the week of October 24, 2026, to October 31, 2026, as "Bat Week".
S 5640
Data Center Transparency Act of 2026
S 5604
Improving Species Recovery Act
S 5653
Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act of 2026
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.