Public Company Advisory Committee Act of 2026

Download PDF
Bill ID: 119/hr/6967
Last Updated: July 5, 2026

Sponsored by

Rep. Lucas, Frank D. [R-OK-3]

ID: L000491

Follow the money

The bill

Public Company Advisory Committee Act of 2026

HR. 6967, 119th Congress — read as touching Investment Banking & Securities.

The sponsor

Rep. Lucas, Frank D. [R-OK-3]

Every bill has someone who introduced it. That name is where the paper trail starts.

The money

$70,950 raised

23 itemised contributions to this sponsor, pulled from FEC filings.

The alignment

63% match to Project 2025

This bill's text tracks the "Introduction" section, p. 863-865 of the Mandate for Leadership.

Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law

Track this bill's progress through the legislative process

Latest Action

Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 479.

March 18, 2026

Introduced

📍 Current Status

Next: The bill will be reviewed by relevant committees who will debate, amend, and vote on it.

🏛️

Committee Review

🗳️

Floor Action

Passed House

🏛️

Senate Review

🎉

Passed Congress

🖊️

Presidential Action

⚖️

Became Law

📚 How does a bill become a law?

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!

Bill Summary

Another masterpiece of legislative theater, brought to you by the esteemed members of Congress. Let's dissect this farce, shall we?

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The Public Company Advisory Committee Act of 2026 (HR 6967) claims to establish a committee within the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to provide advice on regulatory priorities, corporate governance, and capital formation. How quaint. In reality, this bill is a Trojan horse for special interests to influence SEC policy.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill creates a 10-20 member advisory committee, comprised of public company executives, industry association representatives, and professional service providers (i.e., lawyers, accountants, and investment bankers). The committee will provide "advice" on various topics, but not on enforcement matters. Because, you know, the SEC needs more advice from the very people they're supposed to regulate.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The usual suspects: public companies, industry associations, and professional service providers. They'll get to shape SEC policy to their advantage, while the rest of us are left in the dark.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** This bill is a classic case of regulatory capture. By stacking the committee with special interests, Congress is ensuring that the SEC will prioritize the needs of big business over those of investors and the general public. The "advice" provided by this committee will likely lead to watered-down regulations, reduced transparency, and increased opportunities for corporate malfeasance.

In short, HR 6967 is a disease masquerading as a cure. It's a symptom of a larger problem: the corrupting influence of money in politics. The real diagnosis? A bad case of "Regulatory Capture-itis," caused by an overdose of special interest lobbying and a severe lack of accountability.

Treatment? A healthy dose of skepticism, a strong stomach for the truth, and a willingness to call out this legislative farce for what it is: a thinly veiled attempt to further enrich the already powerful at the expense of everyone else.

Related Topics

Banking & Financial ServicesCongressional Rules & Procedures
Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (Dr. Haus personality)

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Rep. Lucas, Frank D. [R-OK-3]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions
$70,950
20 donors
PACs
$0
Organizations
$4,950
Committees
$0
Individuals
$66,000

No PAC contributions found

1
SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY
3 transactions
$4,950

No committee contributions found

1
LOVE, GREG
2 transactions
$6,600
2
GATES, WILLIAM
1 transaction
$3,300
3
NATION, CHEROKEE
1 transaction
$3,300
4
PILLMORE, BRIAN
1 transaction
$3,300
5
HILLIARY, MEGAN
1 transaction
$3,300
6
WILMES, JEFF
1 transaction
$3,300
7
WORRELL, MITCH
1 transaction
$3,300
8
COX, DEBBIE
1 transaction
$3,300
9
HILLIARY, DUSTIN
1 transaction
$3,300
10
LEVERETT, JOE DR.
1 transaction
$3,300
11
OZMEN, FATIH
1 transaction
$3,300
12
HILLIARY, TRINITY
1 transaction
$3,300
13
HILLIARY, CHERYL
1 transaction
$3,300
14
MARTIN, DWAYNE
1 transaction
$3,300
15
HILLIARY, MIKE
1 transaction
$3,300
16
COX, ROBERT
1 transaction
$3,300
17
GALLAGHER, TATUM
1 transaction
$3,300
18
HILLIARY, EDWARD
1 transaction
$3,300
19
MCCALL, CARSON
1 transaction
$3,300

Cosponsors & Their Campaign Finance

This bill has 1 cosponsors. Below are their top campaign contributors.

Rep. Pettersen, Brittany [D-CO-7]

ID: P000620

Top Contributors

10

1
HABEMATOLEL POMO OF UPPER LAKE TRIBE OF CALIFORNIA
OrganizationUPPER LAKE, CA
$3,300
Mar 31, 2023
2
HABEMATOLEL POMO OF UPPER LAKE TRIBE OF CALIFORNIA
OrganizationUPPER LAKE, CA
$3,300
Mar 31, 2023
3
OTOE-MISSOURIA TRIBE OF OKLAHOMA
OrganizationRED ROCK, OK
$3,300
Mar 31, 2023
4
OTOE-MISSOURIA TRIBE OF OKLAHOMA
OrganizationRED ROCK, OK
$3,300
Mar 31, 2023
5
TURTLE MOUNTAIN BAND OF CHIPPEWA OF NORTH DAKOTA
OrganizationBELCOURT, ND
$3,300
Mar 31, 2023
6
TURTLE MOUNTAIN BAND OF CHIPPEWA OF NORTH DAKOTA
OrganizationBELCOURT, ND
$3,300
Jun 10, 2024
7
EASTERN BAND OF CHEROKEE INDIANS
OrganizationCHEROKEE, NC
$3,300
Oct 16, 2024
8
THE CHICKASAW NATION
OrganizationADA, OK
$2,300
Dec 21, 2023
9
BGR GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS, LLC
OrganizationWASHINGTON, DC
$1,000
Oct 12, 2023
10
THE CHICKASAW NATION
OrganizationADA, OK
$1,000
May 22, 2023

Donor Network - Rep. Lucas, Frank D. [R-OK-3]

PACs
Organizations
Individuals
Politicians

Hub layout: Politicians in center, donors arranged by type in rings around them.

Loading...

Showing 36 nodes and 26 connections (39 secondary connections hidden)

Total contributions: $80,850

Top Donors - Rep. Lucas, Frank D. [R-OK-3]

Showing top 20 donors by contribution amount

1 Org19 Individuals

Industry Impact

Which industries are materially affected by specific provisions in this bill. 2 helped.

  • Section 2(b)(1)(C) includes professional advisers and service providers such as investment bankers as eligible members of the Public Company Advisory Committee, providing them a formal advisory role to the SEC, which is a benefit.

  • +Big Tech Platformsconfidence 0.70

    Section 2(b)(1)(A) allows officers, directors, or senior officials of public companies (including big tech platforms like Apple, Microsoft, etc.) to serve on the Committee, giving them influence over SEC rules affecting capital formation and corporate governance.

Who funds the sponsor on these industries

For each industry this bill affects, here's what the sponsor (Rep. Lucas, Frank D. [R-OK-3])received from donors associated with that industry during the 2022–present cycles. Donations are not proof of intent — they are a record of who funds the people writing the law.

Industries this bill HELPS

Project 2025 Policy Matches

This bill shows semantic similarity to the following sections of the Project 2025 policy document.

Introduction

Moderate63.4%
Pages: 863-865

— 830 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise l Three basic categories of firm: private firms, an intermediate category of smaller firms,4 and public firms; l Reasonable, scaled disclosure requirements; and l Specified secondary markets for the securities of these firms.5 The SEC needs to be reformed to achieve its important core functions more effectively, to improve transparency and due process, and to reduce unnecessary regulatory impediments to capital formation.6 Under current law, the SEC Chair- man has the authority to make almost all of the necessary changes.7 Unfortunately, financial regulators, particularly the SEC and the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), are poorly managed and organized. With regulatory authority delegated by the government, both the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) and FINRA have proved to be ineffective, costly, opaque, and largely impervious to reform. To reduce costs and improve transparency, due process, congressional oversight, and responsiveness, PCAOB and FINRA should be abolished, and their regulatory functions should be merged into the SEC. Furthermore, Congress should establish an indepen- dent board or commission and charge it with producing a detailed report within 18 months that examines the degree to which the regulatory functions of the var- ious other so-called self-regulatory organizations (SROs), which are no longer self-regulatory in any meaningful sense, should be moved to the SEC.8 Discrimination based on immutable characteristics has no place in financial regulation. Offices at financial regulators that promote racist policies (usually in the name of “diversity, equity, and inclusion”) should be abolished, and regulations that require appointments on the basis of race, ethnicity, sex, or sexual orientation should be eliminated. Equal protection of the law, equal opportunity, and individ- ual merit should govern regulatory decisions.9 Congress has given the SEC broad “general exemptive authority,”10 but the SEC has used this authority only rarely. It should use this authority significantly more often to reduce the regulatory burden on issuers, particularly smaller entrepreneurs. ENTREPRENEURIAL CAPITAL FORMATION Financial regulators should remove regulatory impediments to entrepreneur- ial capital formation.11 In the absence of the fundamental reform outlined above, the SEC should: l Simplify and streamline Regulation A (the small issues exemption)12 and Regulation CF (crowdfunding)13 and preempt blue sky registration and quali- fication requirements for all primary and secondary Regulation A offerings.14

Introduction

Moderate63.4%
Pages: 863-865

— 830 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise l Three basic categories of firm: private firms, an intermediate category of smaller firms,4 and public firms; l Reasonable, scaled disclosure requirements; and l Specified secondary markets for the securities of these firms.5 The SEC needs to be reformed to achieve its important core functions more effectively, to improve transparency and due process, and to reduce unnecessary regulatory impediments to capital formation.6 Under current law, the SEC Chair- man has the authority to make almost all of the necessary changes.7 Unfortunately, financial regulators, particularly the SEC and the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), are poorly managed and organized. With regulatory authority delegated by the government, both the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) and FINRA have proved to be ineffective, costly, opaque, and largely impervious to reform. To reduce costs and improve transparency, due process, congressional oversight, and responsiveness, PCAOB and FINRA should be abolished, and their regulatory functions should be merged into the SEC. Furthermore, Congress should establish an indepen- dent board or commission and charge it with producing a detailed report within 18 months that examines the degree to which the regulatory functions of the var- ious other so-called self-regulatory organizations (SROs), which are no longer self-regulatory in any meaningful sense, should be moved to the SEC.8 Discrimination based on immutable characteristics has no place in financial regulation. Offices at financial regulators that promote racist policies (usually in the name of “diversity, equity, and inclusion”) should be abolished, and regulations that require appointments on the basis of race, ethnicity, sex, or sexual orientation should be eliminated. Equal protection of the law, equal opportunity, and individ- ual merit should govern regulatory decisions.9 Congress has given the SEC broad “general exemptive authority,”10 but the SEC has used this authority only rarely. It should use this authority significantly more often to reduce the regulatory burden on issuers, particularly smaller entrepreneurs. ENTREPRENEURIAL CAPITAL FORMATION Financial regulators should remove regulatory impediments to entrepreneur- ial capital formation.11 In the absence of the fundamental reform outlined above, the SEC should: l Simplify and streamline Regulation A (the small issues exemption)12 and Regulation CF (crowdfunding)13 and preempt blue sky registration and quali- fication requirements for all primary and secondary Regulation A offerings.14 — 831 — Financial Regulatory Agencies l Either democratize access to private offerings by broadening the definition of accredited investor for purposes of Regulation D or eliminate the accredited investor restriction altogether.15 l Allow traditional self-certification of accredited investor status for all Regulation D Rule 506 offerings. l Exempt small micro-offerings from registration requirements.16 l Exempt small and intermittent finders from broker–dealer registration requirements and provide a simplified registration process for private placement brokers.17 l Exempt peer-to-peer lending from federal and state securities laws and reduce the regulatory burden on Regulation CF debt securities. l Make the Title I Emerging Growth Company (EGC) exemptions permanent for all EGCs. l Reduce the regulatory burden on small broker–dealers and exempt privately held, non-custodial broker–dealers from the requirements to use a PCAOB- registered firm for their audits. Congress should: l Amend the Internal Revenue Code to disregard crowdfunding and Regulation A shareholders for purposes of the 100-shareholder limit for Subchapter S corporations.18 BETTER CAPITAL MARKETS To improve capital markets, the SEC should: l Preempt blue sky registration, qualification, and continuing reporting requirements for securities traded on established securities markets (including a national securities exchange or an alternative trading system).19 l Terminate the Consolidated Audit Trail (CAT) program.20 l Abolish Rule 144 and other regulations that restrict securities resales and instead require a company that has sold securities to provide sufficient current informa- tion to the market to permit reasonable investment decisions and secondary sales.

Introduction

Moderate60.5%
Pages: 859-862

— 827 — Section 5: Independent Regulatory Agencies with government.” Under the Biden FTC, he writes, firms try “to get out of anti- trust liability by offering climate, diversity, or other forms of ESG-type offerings.” Candeub says that state AGs “are far more responsive to their constituents” than the federal government generally is, and he recommends that the FTC establish a position in the chairman’s office that is “focused on state AG cooperation and inviting state AGs to Washington, DC, to discuss enforcement policy in key sectors under the FTC’s jurisdiction: Big Tech, hospital mergers, supermarket mergers, and so forth.” — 829 — 27 FINANCIAL REGULATORY AGENCIES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION AND RELATED AGENCIES David R. Burton The primary purposes of the laws and regulations governing capital markets and of capital market regulators are to deter and punish fraud and other material misstatements to investors; foster reasonable, scaled disclosure of information that is material to investors’ financial outcomes and proxy voting decisions; and maintain fair, orderly, and efficient secondary capital markets. The Securities Act of 19331 and the Securities Exchange Act of 19342 reflect nearly nine decades of rushed and haphazard amendments. The securities laws are now extremely complex and do not constitute a coherent, rational regulatory regime. For example, the current SEC has proposed a climate change reporting rule that would quadruple the costs of being a public company.3 This would have a substantial adverse impact on existing companies. Over time, it would also sub- stantially reduce the number of public companies and therefore the number of investing options available to ordinary Americans. The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) should be reducing impediments to capital formation, not rad- ically increasing them. The SEC and Congress should fundamentally reform the securities laws gov- erning issuers, broker–dealers, exchanges, and other market participants. Among other things, they should establish a simplified and rationalized securities disclo- sure system with:

Showing 3 of 5 policy matches

About These Correlations

Policy matches are calculated using semantic similarity between bill summaries and Project 2025 policy text. A score of 60% or higher indicates meaningful thematic overlap. This does not imply direct causation or intent, but highlights areas where legislation aligns with Project 2025 policy objectives.

Full Policy Text

Related Bills