The paragraph under each bill and the scores beside it were written by an AI model from the bill's text; the rest is the record.
▶In committee20 billsIntroduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
What happens next: The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Now: handed to a committee to examine — Committee on Veterans' Affairs · Oct 1
This bill aims to give people more flexibility when transferring Post-9/11 Educational Assistance. Specifically, it changes the service requirements needed to transfer these benefits.
Yes· 2 of 6
Would veterans be better off under this, taking everything together?+7The bill directly improves flexibility for veterans and service members wishing to transfer their Post-9/11 Educational Assistance to dependents.
Does this increase the pay, pensions or support veterans receive?+6The bill amends title 38 to make the transferability of Post-9/11 Educational Assistance more flexible by setting a consistent six-year service requirement and allowing transfers at any time.
Now: handed to a committee to examine — Committee on Natural Resources · Aug 31
This bill proposes to change the name of Lake Ontario. Under this act, the body of water would be known as "Lake America."
Yes
Does this better protect public land such as parks and forests?+1The bill changes the name of a major water body, which constitutes a minor change in how public geography is managed.
Now: handed to a committee to examine — Committee on Education and Workforce · Jul 22
This bill aims to update the Federal Employees' Compensation Act to improve outcomes for injured workers and reduce costs and fraud.
Yes· 2 of 5
Does this make the government pay for what it commits to?+5By containing costs through managed care, the bill seeks more efficient use of federal funds.
Does this reduce what the federal government spends?+5The bill aims to reduce federal compensation costs, which creates a burden on taxpayers.
The opposite
Does this protect people from being watched or searched?-2The use of predictive analytics and AI to monitor claims may impact privacy.
Now: handed to a committee to examine — Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned · Jun 9
This bill aims to protect United States seaports from the dangers posed by unmanned aircraft systems.
Yes
Does this better protect the country from computer attacks?+3The bill protects seaport security systems from interference by unauthorized drones.
Does this change how police departments operate?+2The bill expands the authorities of law enforcement and federal agencies to detect and disable unauthorized drones in seaport airspace.
The opposite· 2 of 3
Does this make it easier to run a small business?-3The bill imposes strict airspace restrictions and heavy penalties that may impact small drone operators and commercial interests near seaports.
Would business owners be better off under this?-2The bill imposes significant civil and criminal penalties on those operating unmanned aircraft systems.
Now: handed to a committee to examine — Committee on the Judiciary · May 22
Patronis along with three other representatives. The sole purpose of the legislation is to repeal the Hughes Amendment to the Firearm Owners' Protection Act.
Yes
Would gun owners be better off under this?+10Gun owners benefit directly by gaining the legal ability to possess and transfer machineguns following the repeal of the Hughes Amendment.
Does this protect the right to own guns?+10The legislation expands firearm access by repealing the Hughes Amendment ban on machineguns, strengthening Second Amendment rights for gun owners.
The opposite
Does this put more limits on buying or owning guns?-10The bill repeals the federal ban on the possession and transfer of machineguns, directly opposing stricter gun control measures.
Now: handed to a committee to examine — Committee on Health · Jun 5
This bill amends title 38, United States Code, to expand the Veterans Community Care Program so that certain veterans can access mental health or substance-use services outside of the Department of Veterans Affairs.
Yes· 2 of 5
Would veterans be better off under this, taking everything together?+8The bill enhances veterans' ability to access timely mental health and substance-use residential treatment through community care.
Does this make mental health care easier to get?+8The bill expands access to community-based residential mental health and substance-use services when the VA cannot meet access standards.
Now: handed to a committee to examine — Committee on Armed Services · Apr 28
This bill aims to amend title 10 of the United States Code. It seeks to include Coast Guard installations within the defense community infrastructure pilot program.
Yes· 2 of 6
Is this likely to create jobs?+3The expansion of infrastructure funding to include Coast Guard installations may facilitate local job growth through construction and maintenance projects.
Does this repair or build roads and bridges?+3The bill allows community infrastructure projects supporting Coast Guard installations to receive grants and funding.
Now: handed to a committee to examine — Committee on Ways and Means · Feb 5
This bill aims to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. It proposes to allow distributions from qualified tuition programs to be used for qualified housing expenses.
Yes· 2 of 7
Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this?+4The bill specifically assists first-time homebuyers, a demographic that often includes young adults entering the housing market.
Would students be better off under this?+4The bill allows students or former students with 529 accounts to use those funds toward purchasing their first home.
Now: handed to a committee to examine — Committee on Energy and Commerce · Jan 13
The main purpose of the bill is to completely repeal section 230 of the Communications Act of 1934.
Yes· 2 of 5
Does this put more rules on large technology companies?+7Repealing Section 230 removes a major legal shield used by large technology companies, effectively increasing their legal liability.
Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices?+5The repeal of Section 230 may increase consumer recourse against online platforms for hosted content.
The opposite
Does this change how police departments operate?-2Removing liability protections may impact how online evidence and communication are treated in legal proceedings.
