Latest action: Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
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
Bill would make SSI payments equal across all U.S. states and territories.
The problem
Supplemental Security Income payments vary by state, creating unequal benefits for disabled and elderly people depending on where they live.
The proposal
Standardizes SSI payment amounts nationwide by establishing uniform federal benefit levels, eliminating state-by-state differences.
The impact
Disabled, elderly, and blind individuals receiving SSI would see benefit changes; some states would increase payments while others might decrease them.
People with the same disability or age would receive identical benefits no matter where they live. This creates equal opportunity and removes geographic disadvantages.
One federal payment system is easier to manage than tracking 50+ different state programs. This could reduce administrative costs and errors.
Standardizing payments could help people in low-payment states escape poverty more easily by guaranteeing minimum income levels everywhere.
People could move between states without losing benefits, allowing them to pursue job opportunities or family connections.
If standardized payments are high, federal spending increases significantly. If standardized payments are low, it helps federal budget but hurts beneficiaries.
States that currently supplement SSI would lose flexibility. Some states might reduce their own contributions, leaving beneficiaries worse off.
States with lower costs of living might see inflation if benefits are set to match higher-cost states. Local economies could face unexpected changes.
Transitioning millions of people to new payment levels creates confusion, errors, and delays. Some beneficiaries could temporarily lose income.
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.