Latest action: Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
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
Creates a new office to monitor artificial intelligence and emerging technology threats.
The problem
Rapid advances in AI and new technologies may pose risks to national security and public safety that require dedicated government oversight and coordination.
The proposal
Establishes an Office of Artificial Intelligence and Emerging Technology Threats within the President's Executive Office to monitor, analyze, and coordinate responses to AI risks.
The impact
Federal government gains centralized AI oversight. Tech companies may face new regulations. Government agencies coordinate AI policy. Public safety and security potentially improve.
Creates one clear government office to watch AI developments and threats. This prevents confusion when multiple agencies work separately on the same issues.
A dedicated office can respond quickly to emerging AI dangers. It can coordinate across government agencies to handle problems efficiently.
Monitoring AI threats helps protect against foreign actors using advanced technology against the United States. This strengthens overall national defense.
Experts focused on AI can provide Congress and the President with better information for making technology laws and policies.
Another government office means more spending and staff. It could slow down decision-making instead of speeding it up.
Heavy government oversight of AI could discourage companies from developing new technology. Businesses might move AI work to other countries.
The bill doesn't specify what powers this office has or how it works with other agencies. This could create conflicts and confusion.
Monitoring AI systems could require collecting data on citizens and companies. This raises questions about privacy and government surveillance.
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
No donor data found for current cycle
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.