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
Requires AI systems to disclose how they work and what data they use.
The problem
AI systems are increasingly used in important decisions, but people often don't know how they work or what information they're based on.
The proposal
The bill would require companies to make AI systems more transparent by explaining their design, data sources, and how they make decisions.
The impact
AI companies must provide more information. Users and regulators gain insight into AI decision-making. Potential compliance costs for businesses.
When AI systems affect people's lives—like loan approvals or job hiring—transparency helps users know why decisions were made. This builds trust and lets people challenge unfair outcomes.
Regulators and the public can spot problems with biased or harmful AI systems more easily. Companies become responsible for explaining their AI's actions.
Transparency makes it harder for AI systems to secretly discriminate based on race, gender, or other protected characteristics. Bias becomes visible and can be corrected.
When companies know they must explain their AI systems, they're motivated to build them more carefully and ethically from the start.
Compliance requirements take time and resources. Companies may slow development or avoid creating certain AI systems due to regulatory burden.
Requiring disclosure of how AI systems work could expose valuable proprietary information that companies spent years developing. Competitors could copy these methods.
The bill doesn't specify how much explanation is needed or what counts as sufficient transparency. Vague requirements could create confusion and inconsistent compliance.
Companies must invest in documenting, testing, and explaining their AI systems. Smaller companies may struggle more with these expenses.
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.