HR 9643

0likes☆Favorite🔕SubscribeShare

Introduced ↻ Update bill dataRe-checks Congress.gov for new actions and updates the bill's status, and fills in any sponsors, committees, or related bills that are missing. It does not re-pull sponsors/cosponsors/committees/related — those rarely change — and it skips all work if nothing has changed upstream, so it's cheap to click. Contact your reps Urge the sponsor

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

July 13, 2026

Mr. Higgins of Louisiana introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform

A BILL

To amend section 206 of the E-Government Act of 2002 to improve the integrity and management of mass comments and computer-generated comments in the regulatory review process, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the “Comment Integrity and Management Act”.

SEC. 2. PURPOSE.

The purpose of this Act is to help Federal agencies manage mass and computer-generated comments in the Federal regulatory process. This should in no way be understood to discourage mass comments, which are a vital part of the regulatory process.

SEC. 3. IMPROVING INTEGRITY AND MANAGEMENT OF MASS COMMENTS AND COMPUTER-GENERATED COMMENTS IN THE REGULATORY REVIEW PROCESS.

(a) In General.—Section 206 of the E-Government Act of 2002 (Public Law 107-347; 44 U.S.C. 3501 note) is amended by—

(1) redesignating subsection (e) as subsection (f); and

(2) inserting after subsection (d) the following:

“(e) Information Integrity.—

“(1) Verification of electronic submissions.—With respect to each comment accepted by electronic means under subsection

(c), in accordance with the guidance established by Director in paragraph (3), the head of an agency shall verify, to the greatest extent possible, at the time the comment is submitted, whether the comment has been submitted by a human being.

“(2) Identification and management of mass comments.—

“(A) Identification of mass comments.—With respect to each comment accepted by electronic means under subsection (c) by the head of an agency, the head of the agency shall—

“(i) to the extent practicable, reasonably determine whether such comment is a mass comment; and

“(ii) in the case that the agency has made a reasonable determination that the comment is a mass comment, indicate on any publicly available copy of the comment, or comment variations, (through a label or indicator, and in a machine and human readable format), that the comment is part of a mass comment submission; and

“(B) Handling of mass comments.—Notwithstanding subsection (d)(2)(A), instead of making available through the electronic docket of the agency each comment identified as a mass comment under paragraph

(2), the head of an agency may—

“(i) make available through such docket only a single representative sample of each such mass comment; or

“(ii) in the case where mass comments take the form of variations on certain standardized but not identical language the agency make available through such docket a single copy of one of the variations of the mass comment.

“(C) Number of submissions.—In the case in which the head of an agency makes available through such docket a single representative sample or a single copy of one of the variations of a mass comment under subparagraph (B), the head of the agency shall indicate (through a label or indicator, and in a machine and human readable format), on the sample or copy made available, the number of submissions that were determined to be identical, or substantively identical to the sample or copy made available on such docket.

“(3) OMB guidance.—

“(A) Guidance.—Not later than 240 days after the date of the enactment of this subsection, the Director, in consultation with the Administrator of General Services, shall issue guidance to the heads of each agency on the implementation of the requirements of this subsection.

“(B) Contents of guidance.—The guidance issued pursuant to subparagraph (A) shall include recommendations for agencies on how to best manage comments accepted by electronic means, including recommendations on how to do the following:

“(i) Use technology tools and procedures that verify, to the greatest extent possible, whether a comment is being submitted by a human being.

“(ii) Identify mass comments, including how to leverage software tools to identify whether a comment is a mass comment.

“(iii) Indicate (through a label or indicator, and in a machine- and human-readable format), that a comment is a mass comment.

“(iv) Use new technology to offer new opportunities for public participation in the rulemaking process.

“(C) Updates.—The Director, in consultation with the Administrator of General Services, may update the guidance issued pursuant to subparagraph (A), as determined necessary by the Director.

“(4) Policies concerning posting and consideration of computer-generated comments and mass comments.—

“(A) In general.—Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this subsection, the head of each agency shall establish a policy with respect to the posting and consideration of computer-generated comments and mass-comments during the rulemaking process of the agency that is consistent with—

“(i) the requirements of paragraph (2); and

“(ii) the guidance issued under paragraph

(3).

“(B) Availability of policy.—Not later than 60 days after the date on which the head of an agency establishes a policy pursuant to subparagraph (A), the head of the agency shall, to the extent practicable, post the policy on the website through which an agency makes comments available pursuant to subsection

(d)(2)(A).

“(C) Update to policy.—The policy established pursuant to subparagraph (A)—

“(i) shall be updated as necessary to make such guidance consistent with any updates to the guidance issued under paragraph (3); and

“(ii) may be updated by the head of the agency, in consultation with the Director, as the head of the agency determines appropriate.

“(5) Exception to time limitation for implementation.—The requirement described under subsection (f) shall not apply to this subsection.

“(6) Definitions.—In this subsection:

“(A) Comment.—The term ‘comment’ means a submission under section 553(c) of title 5, United States Code.

“(B) Computer-generated comment.—The term ‘computer-generated comment’ means a comment the substance of which is primarily generated by computer software, including through the use of artificial intelligence, rather than by a human being.

“(C) Mass comment.—The term ‘mass comment’ means a comment submitted as part of an organized submission of a large volume of identical, or substantively identical, comments submitted by different signatories or entities.”.

(b) Update to Websites, Information Systems of Agencies.—

(1) In general.—Not later than 18 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, the head of each agency subject to the requirements of section 206(e) of the E-Government Act, as added by subsection (a), shall update any website of the agency, and any information system of the agency, as necessary to ensure compliance with the requirements of such section.

(2) Regulations.gov.—The Administrator of General Services, acting through the eRulemaking Program Management Office, shall update Regulations.gov as necessary to ensure compliance with the requirements of section 206(e) of the E- Government Act, as added by subsection (a).

(3) Erulemaking system.—The Administrator of General Services shall update the shared eRulemaking system on behalf of participating agencies.

(c) GAO Report on Computer-Generated Comments.—

(1) Report.—Not later than 2 years after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General of the United States shall submit to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs of the Senate a report on the identification of computer-generated comments under section 206(e) of the E-Government Act of 2002 (Public Law 107-347; 44 U.S.C. 3501 note), that includes the following:

(A) Recommendations on how to identify if a submission under that section is a computer-generated comment.

(B) Any effect that computer-generated comments have on the rulemaking process.

(C) The extent to which the public uses computer- generated comments to participate in the rulemaking process at the time the report is submitted.

(D) How prevalent computer-generated comments are at the time the report is submitted.

(E) How prevalent the Comptroller General anticipates computer-generated comments will be 5 years after the date on which the report is submitted.

(d) Rule of Construction.—Nothing in this Act, or the amendments made by this Act, may be construed as affecting the consideration of a mass comment by the head of an agency during the rulemaking process.

(e) Definitions.—In this section:

(1) Comment.—The term “comment” means a submission under section 553(c) of title 5, United States Code.

(2) Computer-generated comments.—The term “computer- generated comment” means a comment the substance of which is primarily generated by computer software, including through the use of artificial intelligence, rather than by a human being.

(3) Director.—The term “Director” means the Director of the Office of Management and Budget.

(4) Mass comment.—The term “mass comment” means a comment submitted as part of an organized submission of a large volume of identical, or substantively identical, comments submitted by different signatories or entities. <all>