Student Aid Fraud Oversight and Accountability Act of 2026

Download PDF

Bill ID: 119/hr/7891

Last Updated: July 22, 2026

Student Aid Fraud Oversight and Accountability Act of 2026

HR. 7891, 119th Congress — read as touching For-Profit Education & Student Loans.

The sponsor

Rep. Thompson, Glenn [R-PA-15]

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

The money

$71,700 raised

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

The alignment

70% match to Project 2025

This bill's text tracks the "Department of Education" section, p. 383-385 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. 582.

May 25, 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

Summary Style:

The Student Aid Fraud Oversight and Accountability Act of 2026, HR 7891, is a bill that warrants scrutiny from a rational, self-interested perspective. As a visionary entrepreneur and thought leader, I shall dissect this legislation to discern its implications on my empire's wealth and influence.

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The primary objective of this bill is to amend the Higher Education Act of 1965, specifically section 498A, to prioritize program reviews of institutions that disburse federal financial aid without verifying student identities when there is a reasonable suspicion of identity fraud. This measure aims to curb potential abuse and ensure accountability in the distribution of federal student aid.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill introduces new provisions requiring the Secretary of Education to identify institutions that have disbursed federal financial aid to students with suspected identity fraud. These institutions will be subject to prioritized program reviews, audits, and investigations. The legislation also establishes procedures for institutions to verify student identities using in-person or live audiovisual verification.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The primary stakeholders affected by this bill are institutions of higher education, the Secretary of Education, and students receiving federal financial aid. However, as a billionaire entrepreneur with significant investments in the education technology sector, I must consider how this legislation may impact my own interests. The bill's emphasis on identity verification and accountability could create new opportunities for innovative solutions and services, potentially disrupting traditional players in the market.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** From a wealth and power perspective, this bill presents both risks and opportunities. On one hand, increased scrutiny and regulation may lead to additional compliance costs and bureaucratic hurdles for institutions, which could ultimately benefit my own education technology ventures. On the other hand, the bill's focus on identity verification and accountability may create new market demand for innovative solutions, potentially disrupting traditional players in the market.

As a thought leader at the forefront of innovation, I must consider how this legislation aligns with my own vision for the future of education. The Student Aid Fraud Oversight and Accountability Act of 2026 has the potential to drive growth and consolidation in the education technology sector, ultimately benefiting my own interests. By prioritizing program reviews and emphasizing accountability, this bill may create new opportunities for innovative solutions and services, further solidifying my position as a leader in the industry.

In conclusion, HR 7891 is a bill that warrants careful consideration from a rational, self-interested perspective. As a billionaire entrepreneur with significant investments in the education technology sector, I must navigate the potential risks and opportunities presented by this legislation to ensure that my own interests are protected and advanced. By doing so, I can continue to drive growth and innovation in the industry, ultimately benefiting my own wealth and influence.

💰 Campaign Finance Network

Rep. Thompson, Glenn [R-PA-15]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions

$71,700

26 donors

PACs

Organizations

$28,700

Committees

Individuals

$43,000

No PAC contributions found

BUTLER MACHINE

2 transactions

$6,600

CHOCTAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA

1 transaction

$3,300

CORTINA HULLING & SHELLING GROUP

1 transaction

$3,300

AG VENTURES

1 transaction

$2,500

ROESLEIN ALTERNATIVE ENERGY, LLC

1 transaction

$2,000

KOHL REAL ESTATE

2 transactions

$2,000

EUROOPTIC, LTD

2 transactions

$2,000

RANCH 440

1 transaction

$1,500

DWIGHT STANSEL FARM & NURSERY

1 transaction

$1,000

HIGHLINE GRAIN GROWERS INC

1 transaction

$1,000

SCHRACK FARMS

1 transaction

$1,000

LUKE ROBISON FARMS LLC

1 transaction

$1,000

ARK-LA-TEX FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS LLC

1 transaction

$500

HARLOW CATTLE LLC

1 transaction

$500

MID ATLANTIC ASSOCIATION OF CAREER SCHOOLS

1 transaction

$500

No committee contributions found

BARENSFELD, WENDY H. MRS.

2 transactions

$6,600

LEMEUR, HENRI E. JR.

1 transaction

$5,000

MYERS, JOEL N. DR.

1 transaction

$5,000

FONALLEDAS, JAIME L JR.

1 transaction

$3,300

GUILLERMETY, RAFAEL

1 transaction

$3,300

ASHER, ROBERT B. MR.

1 transaction

$3,300

CIARROCCHI, GUY

1 transaction

$3,300

LEPRINO, JAMES G. MR.

1 transaction

$3,300

MYERS, STEPHANIE

1 transaction

$3,300

VAN VLECK, NICOLE

1 transaction

$3,300

VANN, JAMES

1 transaction

$3,300

Cosponsors & Their Campaign Finance

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

Rep. Foxx, Virginia [R-NC-5]

ID: F000450

Top Contributors

SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY

OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN

$3,300

Apr 26, 2024

EASTERN BAND OF CHEROKEE INDIANS

OrganizationCHEROKEE, NC

$2,000

Dec 18, 2023

SANTA YNEZ BAND OF CHUMASH INDIANS

OrganizationSANTA YNEZ, CA

$2,000

Mar 11, 2024

SHAKOPEE MDEWAKANTON SIOUX COMMUNITY

OrganizationPRIOR LAKE, MN

$1,650

May 31, 2023

CATAWBA NATION TRIBE

OrganizationROCK HILL, SC

$1,500

Mar 1, 2024

MORONGO BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

OrganizationBANNING, CA

$1,500

Jun 30, 2023

MORONGO BAND OF MISSION INDIANS

OrganizationBANNING, CA

$1,500

Apr 29, 2024

MOORE, JOHN T. MR.

MARWOOD GROUP • CEO

IndividualNEW YORK, NY

$5,000

Aug 26, 2024

BARKER, PATRICIA M. MRS.

BOB BARKER CO • CORP SECRETARY

IndividualFUQUAY VARINA, NC

$3,300

Oct 28, 2024

DRESCHER, STEPHANIE MS.

APOLLO • PARTNER

IndividualNEW YORK, NY

$3,300

Nov 4, 2024

Donor Network - Rep. Thompson, Glenn [R-PA-15]

Show Also Donated To

PACs

Organizations

Individuals

Politicians

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

Showing 42 nodes and 33 connections (40 secondary connections hidden)

Total contributions: $79,000

Top Donors - Rep. Thompson, Glenn [R-PA-15]

Showing top 25 donors by contribution amount

15 Orgs11 Individuals

Industry Impact

Which industries are materially affected by specific provisions in this bill. 1 harmed.

−For-Profit Education & Student Loansconfidence 0.90
Section 2(b)(2) adds paragraph (4) requiring the Secretary to identify institutions that disburse Title IV aid without verifying identity of students with FAFSA fraud suspicion, which will increase oversight and potential sanctions for for-profit colleges that heavily rely on federal aid and may have weaker identity verification.

Project 2025 Policy Matches

This bill shows semantic similarity to the following sections of the Project 2025 policy document.AI-enhanced analysis provides detailed alignment ratings.

Department of Education

Moderate

Vector: 69%

Pages: 383-385AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"Both the bill and the Project 2025 section focus on Department of Education oversight of Title IV student aid and ensuring program integrity, but the bill addresses fraud prevention while Project 2025 emphasizes school choice, opt-out provisions, and accreditation reform, resulting in only moderate thematic overlap."

Key themes:Department of Education oversightTitle IV student aidprogram integrityaccountability

— 351 — Department of Education as the Educational Choice for Children Act. This bill would create a federal scholarship tax credit that would incentivize donors to contribute to nonprofit scholarship granting organizations (SGOs). Eligible families could then use that funding from the SGOs for their children’s education expenses including private school tuition, tutoring, and instructional materials. ADDITIONAL K–12 REFORMS Allowing States to Opt Out of Federal Education Programs. States should be able to opt out of federal education programs such as the Academic Partnerships Lead Us to Success (APLUS) Act. Much of the red tape and regulations that hinder local school districts are handed down from Washington. This regulatory burden far exceeds the federal government’s less than 10 percent financing share of K–12 education. In the most recent fiscal year (FY 2022), states and localities financed 93 percent of K–12 education costs, and the federal government just 7 percent. That 7 percent share should not allow the federal government to dictate state and local education policy. l To restore state and local control of education and reduce the bureaucratic and compliance burden, Congress should allow states to opt out of the dozens of federal K–12 education programs authorized under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, and instead allow states to put their share of federal funding toward any lawful education purpose under state law. This policy has been advanced over the years via a proposal known as the Academic Partnerships Lead Us to Success (APLUS) Act. HIGHER EDUCATION REFORM HEA: Accreditation Reform Congress established two primary responsibilities for the U.S. Department of Education in the HEA: 1) to ensure the “administrative capacity and financial responsibility” of colleges and universities that accept Title IV funds; and 2) to ensure the quality of those institutions. Congress did not endow the Department of Education with the authority to involve itself in academic quality issues relating to colleges and universities that participate in the Title IV student aid program; the HEA allows the agency only to recognize accreditors, which are then supposed to provide quality assurance measures. Unfortunately, the Biden Administration has followed closely in the footsteps of the Obama Administration by engaging in a politically motivated and incon- sistent administration of the accrediting agency recognition process. As a result, accreditors have transformed into de facto government agents. Despite claims by — 352 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise the department and accreditation agencies that accreditation is voluntary, the fact that Americans are denied access to an otherwise widely available entitle- ment benefit if the institution “elects” to not be accredited makes accreditation anything but voluntary. Today, accreditation determines whether Americans can access federal student aid benefits, transfer academic credits, enroll in higher-level degree programs, and even qualify for federal employment. Unnecessarily focused on schools in a specific geographic region, institutional accreditation reviews have also become wildly expensive audits by academic “peers” that stifle innovation and discourage new institutions of higher education. Of par- ticular concern are efforts by many accreditation agencies to leverage their Title IV (student loans and grants) gatekeeper roles to force institutions to adopt policies that have nothing to do with academic quality assurance and student outcomes. One egregious example of this is the extent to which accreditors have forced col- leges and universities, many of them faith-based institutions, to adopt diversity, equity, and inclusion policies that conflict with federal civil rights laws, state laws, and the institutional mission and culture of the schools. Perhaps more distress- ingly, accreditors, while professing support for academic freedom and campus free speech, have presided over a precipitous decline in both over the past decade. Despite maintaining criteria that demand such policies, accreditors have done nothing to dampen the illiberal chill that has swept across American campuses over the past decade. The current system is not working. A radical overhaul of the HEA’s accreditation requirements is thus in order. The next Administration should work with Congress to amend the HEA and should consider the following reforms: l Prohibit accreditation agencies from leveraging their Title IV gatekeeper role to mandate that educational institutions adopt diversity, equity, and inclusion policies. l Protect the sovereignty of states to decide governance and leadership issues for their state-supported colleges and universities by prohibiting accreditation agencies from intruding upon the governance of state-supported educational institutions. l Protect faith-based institutions by prohibiting accreditation agencies from: 1. Requiring standards and criteria that undermine the religious beliefs of, or require policies or conduct that conflict with, the religious mission or religious beliefs of the institution; and

Department of Education

Weak

Vector: 69%

Pages: 386-388AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"HR 7891 targets identity fraud prevention in student aid disbursement, whereas Project 2025 focuses on loan program restructuring, accreditation reform, and limiting loan forgiveness; the only common ground is a general emphasis on departmental oversight and accountability."

Key themes:accountabilityoversightDepartment of Educationstudent aid integrity

— 353 — Department of Education 2. Intruding on the governance of colleges and universities controlled by a religious organization. l Revamp the system for recognizing accreditation agencies for Title IV purposes by removing the department’s monopoly on recognition by (1) authorizing states to recognize accreditation agencies for Title IV gatekeeping purposes and/or (2) authorizing state agencies to act as accreditation agencies for institutions throughout the United States. The next Administration and Congress might also consider amending the HEA to remove accreditors from the program triad entirely to allow accreditation to return to its original role of voluntary quality assurance. This would permit accreditors to put some “teeth” back into their standards without creating high- stakes disasters, such as institutional loss of Title IV access through paperwork submission errors, a state exercising its constitutional authority to administer its public colleges and universities, or an institution freely exercising the religious beliefs of its founders. With this option, neither the department nor the states would oversee or recognize accrediting agencies. The department’s role would be limited to evaluating the institution’s compliance with federal accounting requirements pursuant to evaluations conducted by appropriately credentialed auditors who have no conflicts of interest in performing the review paid for by the federal agency charged with overseeing compliance—not the institutions being reviewed. HEA: Student Loans l Beyond immediate policy moves and rulemaking to end the current Administration’s abuse of the department’s payment pause and HEA loan forgiveness programs, the department should work with Congress to overhaul the federal student loan program for the benefit of taxpayers and students. The federal government does not have the proper incentives to make sound lending decisions. The new Administration should consider: l Privatizing all lending programs, including subsidized, unsubsidized, and PLUS loans (both Grad and Parent). This would allow for market prices and signals to influence educational borrowing, introducing consumer-driven accountability into higher education. Pell grants should retain their current voucher-like structure. — 354 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise If privatizing student lending is not feasible, then the next Administration should consider the following reforms: l Switch to fair-value accounting from FCRA accounting. l Consolidate all federal loan programs into one new program that a) utilizes income-driven repayment, b) includes no interest rate subsidies or loan forgiveness, c) includes annual and aggregate limits on borrowing, and d) includes skin in the game to hold colleges accountable. l Eliminate Grad PLUS loans (for graduate students) and Parent PLUS loans (for parents of undergraduates). Graduate students are already eligible for unsubsidized Stafford student loans; Grad PLUS loans are redundant. They also lack some of the safeguards of Stafford loans, such as annual and aggregate borrowing limits. Parent PLUS loans are also redundant because there are many privately provided alternatives available. l The Public Service Loan Forgiveness program, which prioritizes government and public sector work over private sector employment, should be terminated. Whatever Congress chooses to do with future loans, there is still the question of the government’s responsible stewardship of the existing student loan portfolio—a substantial taxpayer asset. The current Administration has recklessly engaged in the policy fetish of forgiving and canceling student loans with abandon. l The next Administration should work with Congress to amend the HEA to ensure that no Administration engages in this kind of abuse in the future. l Specifically, the new Administration should urge the Congress to amend the HEA to abrogate, or substantially reduce, the power of the Secretary to cancel, compromise, discharge, or forgive the principal balances of Title IV student loans, as well as to modify in any material way the repayment amounts or terms of Title IV student loans. l Further, the next Administration should propose that Congress amend the HEA to remove the department’s authority to forgive loans based on borrower defense to repayment; instead, the department

Department of Education

Weak

Vector: 68%

Pages: 389-391AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on preventing student aid fraud through identity verification, while the Project 2025 policy emphasizes reducing administrative overreach, increasing transparency, eliminating DEI influence, and reforming accreditation and hiring practices. There is minimal thematic overlap, as the bill does not address guidance documents, First Amendment protections, degree requirements, or DEI accountability in federal programs."

Key themes:Department of Education oversightFederal program accountability

— 357 — Department of Education NEW EXECUTIVE ORDERS THAT THE PRESIDENT SHOULD ISSUE Guidance Documents l The President should immediately reinstate and reissue Executive Order 13891: Promoting the Rule of Law Through Improved Agency Guidance Documents, 84 Fed. Reg. 55235 (Oct. 9, 2019), and Executive Order 13892: Promoting the Rule of Law Through Transparency and Fairness in Civil Administrative Enforcement and Adjudication (Oct. 15, 2019). These executive orders required all federal agencies to treat guidance documents as non-binding in law and practice and also forbade federal agencies from imposing new standards of conduct on persons outside the executive branch through guid- ance documents. They required all federal agencies to apply regulations and statutes instead of guidance documents in any enforcement action. President Biden revoked these executive orders on January 20, 2021, demonstrating that these executive orders effectively restrained the abuses of an expansive administrative state. l Require APA notice and comment. The President should issue an executive order requiring the Office for Civil Rights’ Case Processing Manual to go through APA (Administrative Procedures Act) notice and comment. l Protect the First Amendment. The President should issue an executive order requiring grant applications (SF-424 series) to contain assurances that the applicant will uphold the First Amendment in funded programs and work. l Minimize bachelor’s degree requirements. The President should issue an executive order stating that a college degree shall not be required for any federal job unless the requirements of the job specifically demand it. l Eliminate the “list of shame.” Educational institutions can claim a religious exemption with the Office for Civil Rights at the Department of Education from the strictures of Title IX. In 2016, the Obama Administration published on the Department of Education’s website a list of colleges that had applied for the exemption. This “list of shame” of faith-based colleges, as it came to be known, has since been archived on ED’s website, still publicly available. The President should issue an executive order removing the archived list and preventing such a list from being published in the future. — 358 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise NEW AGENCY POLICIES THAT DON’T REQUIRE NEW LEGISLATION OR REGULATIONS TO ENACT Transparency of FERPA and PPRA Complaints l The Department of Education should be transparent about complaints filed on behalf of families regarding the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) and the Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment (PPRA). l At the same time, the Department of Education should develop a portal and resources for parents on their rights under FERPA and PPRA. This portal should also contain an explanation of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPPA) and public school procedures to demonstrate that the law does not deprive parents of their right to access any school health records. The D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program In 2011, Congress added new requirements to the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program stating that participating private schools must submit to site visits by the program administrator, inform prospective students about the school’s accreditation status, mandate that teachers of core subjects have bachelor’s degrees, and require participating students to take some form of nationally norm-referenced test. Notably, the 2011 reauthorization also required, for the first time, that participating private schools be accredited or be on a path to accreditation. The 2017 reauthorization went further, requiring that each participating school supply a certificate of accreditation to the administering entity upon program entry, demonstrating that the school is fully accredited before being allowed to participate. The list of approved accreditors is entirely too small to serve the mission of the diverse schools in the nation’s capital. l Although the accreditation regulations should be removed entirely by Congress, in the meantime, the next President should issue an executive order expanding the list of allowable accreditors. Transparency Around Program Performance and DEI Influence The next President should issue a series of executive orders requiring: l An accounting of how federal programs/grants spread DEI/CRT/ gender ideology, l A review of outcomes for GEAR UP and the 21st Century grants programs,

Department of Education

Weak

Vector: 67%

Pages: 386-388AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on preventing student aid fraud through identity verification, while the Project 2025 policy emphasizes reforming accreditation systems and privatizing student loans. There is minimal thematic overlap, as the bill does not address accreditation, religious institution governance, or loan program structure."

Key themes:Department of EducationHigher Education Actstudent aid oversight

Department of Housing and Urban Development

Minimal

Vector: 64%

Pages: 542-544AI Enhanced

AI Analysis:

"The bill focuses on preventing student aid fraud through identity verification in higher education, while the Project 2025 policy addresses HUD reforms related to fair housing repeal, immigration restrictions, work requirements, and housing program changes. There is no substantive overlap in subject matter, agency jurisdiction, or policy objectives."

— 509 — Department of Housing and Urban Development 3. Repeal the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) regulation reinstituted under the Biden Administration30 and any other uses of special-purpose credit authorities to further equity.31 4. Eliminate the new Housing Supply Fund.32 l The Office of the Secretary should recommence proposed regulation put forward under the Trump Administration that would prohibit noncitizens, including all mixed-status families, from living in all federally assisted housing.33 HUD’s statutory obligations include providing housing for American citizens who are in need. HUD reforms must also ensure alignment with reforms implemented by other federal agencies where immigration status impacts public programs, certainly to include any reforms in the Public Charge regulatory framework administered by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Local welfare organizations, not the federal government, should step up to provide welfare for the housing of noncitizens. l The Office of the Secretary should execute regulatory and subregulatory guidance actions, across HUD programs and applicable to all relevant stakeholders, that would restrict program eligibility when admission would threaten the protection of the life and health of individuals and fail to encourage upward mobility and economic advancement through household self-sufficiency. Where admissible in regulatory action, HUD should implement reforms reducing the implicit anti-marriage bias in housing assistance programs,34 strengthen work and work-readiness requirements,35 implement maximum term limits for residents in PBRA and TBRA programs,36 and end Housing First37 policies so that the department prioritizes mental health and substance abuse issues before jumping to permanent interventions in homelessness.38 Notwithstanding administrative reforms, Congress should enact legislation that protects life and eliminates provisions in federal housing and welfare benefits policies that discourage work, marriage, and meaningful paths to upward economic mobility. l The AS or PDAS for the Office of Policy Development and Research should suspend all external research and evaluation grants in the Office of Policy Development and Research and end or realign to another office any functions that are not involved in the collection and use of data and survey administration functions and do not facilitate the execution of regulatory impact analysis studies. — 510 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise l FHA leadership should increase the mortgage insurance premium (MIP) for all products above 20-year terms and maintain MIP for all products below 20-year terms and all refinances. FHA should encourage wealth-building homeownership opportunities, which can be accomplished best through shorter-duration mortgages.39 Ideally, Congress would contemplate a fundamental revision of FHA’s statutory restriction of single-family housing mortgage insurance to first-time homebuyers.40 This would include (with support from HUD leadership): 1. Moving the Home Equity Conversion Mortgages (HECM) program once again to its own special risk insurance fund. 2. Revising loan limit determinations. 3. Providing statutory flexibility for shorter-term products that amortize principal earlier and faster. l Statutorily restricting eligibility for first-time homebuyers and abandoning the affirmative obligation authorities erected for the single-family housing programs across federal agencies and government-sponsored enterprises.41 l The HUD Secretary should move the HUD Real Estate Assessment Center (REAC) from PIH to the Office of Housing, which already implements property standards in its multifamily housing lending programs through the multifamily accelerated processing (MAP) lending guidelines. Giving HUD the authority to streamline the enforcement of compliance with housing standards across the federal government and flexibility for physical inspections through private accreditation should also be considered. l HUD should maintain its requested budget authority for modernization initiatives that are applicable to the Office of the Chief Information Officer and program offices across the department. LONGER-TERM POLICY REFORM CONSIDERATIONS42 Congress has charged HUD principally with mandates for construction of the nation’s affordable housing stock in addition to setting and enforcing standards for decent housing and fair housing enforcement. Regardless of intent, HUD’s efforts have yielded mixed results at best. Even today, more than a half-century after Congress put enforcement of so-called fair housing in the hands of the HUD bureaucracy, implementation of this policy is muddled by the repeated applica- tion of affirmative race-based policies. Also, the production mandate for HUD’s

Showing 3 of 5 policy matches

About These Correlations

Policy matches are calculated using a hybrid approach: initial candidates are found using semantic similarity between bill summaries and Project 2025 policy text, then an AI model (Llama 3.1 70B) provides detailed alignment ratings and analysis. Ratings range from 1 (minimal alignment) to 5 (very strong alignment). This analysis does not imply direct causation or intent.

Related Bills

Other Bills by Rep. Thompson, Glenn

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 10 East Main Street in Mahaffey, Pennsylvania, as the "Robert Allen Bishop, Sr. Post Office Building".

119/hr/7517

Farm, Food, and National Security Act of 2026

119/hr/7567

United States Grain Standards Reauthorization Act of 2025

119/hr/4550

Back to All Bills

Student Aid Fraud Oversight and Accountability Act of 2026