The bill
Information Quality Assurance Act of 2025
HR. 6329, 119th Congress β read as touching Private Equity & Hedge Funds.
Sponsored by
Rep. McClain, Lisa C. [R-MI-9]
ID: M001136
Follow the money
The bill
HR. 6329, 119th Congress β read as touching Private Equity & Hedge Funds.
The sponsor
Every bill has someone who introduced it. That name is where the paper trail starts.
The money
26 itemised contributions to this sponsor, pulled from FEC filings.
Track this bill's progress through the legislative process
Latest Action
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
February 24, 2026
π Current Status
Next: Both chambers must agree on the same version of the bill.
1. Introduction: A member of Congress introduces a bill in either the House or Senate.
2. Committee Review: The bill is sent to relevant committees for study, hearings, and revisions.
3. Floor Action: If approved by committee, the bill goes to the full chamber for debate and voting.
4. Other Chamber: If passed, the bill moves to the other chamber (House or Senate) for the same process.
5. Conference: If both chambers pass different versions, a conference committee reconciles the differences.
6. Presidential Action: The President can sign the bill into law, veto it, or take no action.
7. Became Law: If signed (or if Congress overrides a veto), the bill becomes law!
Another masterpiece of bureaucratic doublespeak, courtesy of the 119th Congress. The "Information Quality Assurance Act of 2025" - because what we really need is more assurance that our government agencies are using high-quality information to make decisions. How quaint.
Let's dissect this legislative abomination:
**New regulations being created or modified:** This bill amends the Information Quality Act, adding new guidelines for federal agencies to ensure they use "the best reasonably available scientific, technical, demographic, economic, and statistical information" when developing rules and guidance. Because, you know, they weren't doing that already.
**Affected industries and sectors:** Every federal agency, which means every industry and sector will be impacted in some way. But let's be real, this is just a thinly veiled attempt to give the appearance of transparency while allowing agencies to continue making decisions based on whatever flawed data they choose.
**Compliance requirements and timelines:** Agencies have one year to update their guidelines, which must then be made available on their websites. Because nothing says "transparency" like burying information in a website that no one will ever visit.
**Enforcement mechanisms and penalties:** Ah, the teeth of this bill - or rather, the lack thereof. There are no real enforcement mechanisms or penalties for non-compliance. It's all just a big game of "trust us, we'll do better next time."
**Economic and operational impacts:** The only impact will be on the wallets of taxpayers, who will foot the bill for this bureaucratic exercise in futility. Agencies will spend millions updating guidelines that no one will read, while continuing to make decisions based on flawed data.
In short, this bill is a classic case of "legislative theater" - all show, no substance. It's a desperate attempt to appear transparent and accountable while doing nothing to actually address the underlying problems. I give it two thumbs down, or rather, two middle fingers up.
Diagnosis: This bill suffers from a severe case of "Bureaucratic Obfuscation Syndrome" (BOS), characterized by an excessive use of jargon, vague language, and a complete lack of teeth. Treatment: a healthy dose of skepticism, followed by a strong injection of transparency and accountability. Prognosis: poor.
Rep. McClain, Lisa C. [R-MI-9]
Congress 119 β’ 2024 Election Cycle
No PAC contributions found
No committee contributions found
This bill has 1 cosponsors. Below are their top campaign contributors.
ID: S001231
Top Contributors
10
Hub layout: Politicians in center, donors arranged by type in rings around them.
Showing 53 nodes and 29 connections (54 secondary connections hidden)
Total contributions: $101,300
Showing top 22 donors by contribution amount
Which industries are materially affected by specific provisions in this bill. 5 harmed.
Section 2(a)(1) updates guidelines to ensure the quality and integrity of information used by Federal agencies, which may lead to increased scrutiny of private equity and hedge fund activities, potentially imposing costs on these industries.
Section 2(c)(1) requires public disclosure of critical factual material used in rulemaking, which may affect big tech platforms' ability to influence regulatory decisions or keep certain information private, potentially imposing costs on these companies.
Section 2(b)(3) ensures administrative mechanisms for correcting influential information are available, which may lead to increased regulatory oversight of commercial banks' activities, potentially imposing costs on these institutions.
Section 2(d)(2) defines 'influential information or evidence', which may lead to increased scrutiny of insurance companies' practices and potential regulatory actions, potentially imposing costs on these companies.
Section 2(c)(2) implements public disclosure requirement exceptions, which may affect telecommunications companies' ability to keep certain information private, potentially imposing costs on these companies.
For each industry this bill affects, here's what the sponsor (Rep. McClain, Lisa C. [R-MI-9])received from donors associated with that industry during the 2022βpresent cycles. Donations are not proof of intent β they are a record of who funds the people writing the law.