A Democratic bill with 5 Republican cosponsors · See all 28 cosponsors
Last activity — Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR H519)
Introduced, nothing more yet
Formally proposed, and not yet handed to a committee.
Nearly every bill is sent to a committee within days. Introduction alone is not a sign of support, of momentum, or of any likelihood of passing — any member may introduce any bill.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
What this bill would do
This bill, known as the "QUIET Act," seeks to amend the Communications Act of 1934. It requires individuals using artificial intelligence to emulate a human being in robocalls or text messages to disclose that AI is being used. The legislation defines robocalls and text messages to establish these requirements. Additionally, it establishes enhanced penalties for violations where artificial intelligence is used to impersonate an individual or entity. These specific violations must involve an intent to defraud, cause harm, or wrongfully obtain anything of value.
Yes· 3 of 24
- Scored +7
Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices?
The bill protects consumers from deceptive AI-driven robocalls and impersonation used to defraud or cause harm.
- Scored +5
Would retired people be better off under this?
The bill provides heightened protection against AI-driven fraud and impersonation which frequently targets seniors.
- Scored +4
Would people with disabilities be better off under this?
Increased transparency and penalties for AI impersonation provide stronger consumer protections for vulnerable groups.
The opposite
No question was scored the opposite.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Mandatory AI Disclosure: If a person uses artificial intelligence to emulate a human being in a robocall or text message, they must disclose the use of AI at the beginning of the communication. This provides transparency to the recipient (Section 2, Subsection k(1)).
-
Increased Penalties for Impersonation: The bill doubles the maximum forfeiture penalties and criminal fines for those who use artificial intelligence to impersonate an individual or entity with the intent to defraud, cause harm, or wrongfully obtain anything of value (Section 3, Subsection l(1)).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- No negative impacts or burdens are explicitly stated in the provided text.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would retired people be better off under this? — The bill provides heightened protection against AI-driven fraud and impersonation which frequently targets seniors. Would people with disabilities be better off under this? — Increased transparency and penalties for AI impersonation provide stronger consumer protections for vulnerable groups. Would Black Americans be better off under this? — The bill provides stronger protections against predatory and fraudulent AI-generated communications. Would Asian Americans be better off under this? — The legislation provides increased transparency for individuals receiving AI-generated calls. Would farmers be better off under this? — The bill offers better protection against deceptive robocalls and text messages. Would gun owners be better off under this? — The bill provides better protection against fraudulent AI-generated text and voice messages. Would high-income households be better off under this? — The bill provides more transparency and protection against AI-driven fraudulent robocalls. Would Hispanic Americans be better off under this? — Mandatory disclosures help protect against deceptions used in automated text and voice messaging. Would immigrants be better off under this? — Increased transparency requirements help protect against fraudulent AI communications. Would LGBTQ people be better off under this? — The bill provides better transparency and protection against deceptive automated communications. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Increased penalties for AI impersonation provide better protection against fraud targeting vulnerable populations. Would men be better off under this? — Increased penalties for AI impersonation help prevent fraudulent digital interactions. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — The mandatory disclosure requirement helps protect middle-income families from deceptive automated communications. Would Native Americans be better off under this? — Increased penalties for AI impersonation offer greater security against fraudulent communications. Would people in rural areas be better off under this? — Mandatory AI disclosures enhance communication transparency for all residents. Would students be better off under this? — The bill helps mitigate the risk of fraud via AI-generated communications. Would union members be better off under this? — The bill protects workers from deceptions used in automated messaging and voice calls. Would people in cities be better off under this? — The bill provides improved protections against deceptive digital communications. Would veterans be better off under this, taking everything together? — Enhanced penalties for AI impersonation help protect individuals from digital fraud. Would white Americans be better off under this? — The bill creates a more transparent environment for telecommunications via AI disclosure. Would women be better off under this? — The bill enhances security against deceptive AI voice or text messages.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices? — The bill protects consumers from deceptive AI-driven robocalls and impersonation used to defraud or cause harm.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this protect people from being watched or searched? — The bill enhances individual protection against AI-driven impersonation and deceptive communications.
- Education And Technology
- Does this put more rules on large technology companies? — The bill adds new regulatory requirements for the use of artificial intelligence in telecommunications.
- 10/5/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 5/13/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 12/18/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 12/16/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 11/25/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 11/20/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 11/7/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 8/29/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 8/8/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 7/14/2025
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- 7/10/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 7/2/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 6/4/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 5/20/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 5/7/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 4/28/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 4/24/2025
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- 4/8/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 3/25/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 2/24/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 2/21/2025
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- 2/12/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 2/6/2025
- Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR H519)
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- 2/5/2025
- Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- Introduced in House
2 bills Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Yassamin AnsariDemocrat · Arizona
Janelle BynumDemocrat · Oregon
Robert BresnahanRepublican · Pennsylvania
Angie CraigDemocrat · Minnesota
Gilbert CisnerosDemocrat · California
Juan CiscomaniRepublican · Arizona
Christopher DeluzioDemocrat · Pennsylvania
Veronica EscobarDemocrat · Texas
Brian FitzpatrickRepublican · Pennsylvania
Raúl GrijalvaDemocrat · Arizona
Josh GottheimerDemocrat · New Jersey
Adelita GrijalvaDemocrat · Arizona
Pablo HernándezDemocrat · Puerto Rico
Ted LieuDemocrat · California
George LatimerDemocrat · New York
Kelly MorrisonDemocrat · Minnesota
Kristen McDonald RivetDemocrat · Michigan
Sarah McBrideDemocrat · Delaware
Eleanor NortonDemocrat · District of Columbia
Zachary NunnRepublican · Iowa
Eric SwalwellDemocrat · California
Darren SotoDemocrat · Florida
Thomas SuozziDemocrat · New York
Melanie StansburyDemocrat · New Mexico
Hillary ScholtenDemocrat · Michigan
Suhas SubramanyamDemocrat · Virginia
Jefferson Van DrewRepublican · New Jersey
Eugene VindmanDemocrat · Virginia