SB 488 — Energy: energy usage information.
Last action — Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 352, Statutes of 2009.
-
✓Introduced
-
✓In Committee
-
✓Passed Senate
-
✓Passed Assembly
-
5To Executive
-
6Enacted
This bill died with 2009-2010 Regular Session. It reached “To Executive” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis. It would have to be reintroduced in the current session to move again.
Summary
(1) Under existing law, the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) has regulatory authority over public utilities, including electrical corporations and gas corporations, as defined. The existing Public Utilities Act requires the PUC to review and adopt a procurement plan for each electrical corporation. The act requires the PUC, in consultation with the State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission (Energy Commission) , to identify all potentially achievable cost-effective electricity efficiency savings and to establish efficiency targets for an electrical corporation to achieve pursuant to its procurement plan. The act requires that an electrical corporation's procurement plan include a showing that the electrical corporation will first meet its unmet resource needs through all available energy efficiency and demand reduction resources that are cost effective, reliable, and feasible. The act requires the PUC, in consultation with the Energy Commission, to identify all potentially achievable cost-effective natural gas efficiency savings and to establish efficiency targets for the gas corporation to achieve these targets and to require that a gas corporation first meet its unmet gas resource needs through all available natural gas efficiency and demand reduction resources that are cost effective, reliable, and feasible. The act requires each electrical corporation and each gas corporation to disclose on the residential customer's billing statement specified information on usage and cost, and contact information for the PUC's Consumer Affairs Branch, and to make available online to residential customers specified information on usage and energy conservation measures. The act authorizes the PUC to modify, adjust, or add to these requirements as the individual circumstances of each electrical corporation or gas corporation merit, or for master-meter customers, as individual circumstances merit. The act requires the PUC, as part of the general rate case of an electrical corporation or gas corporation, to assess opportunities to improve the quality of information contained in the utility's periodic billings. This bill would require each electrical corporation and gas corporation having a comparative energy usage disclosure program, as defined, to report to the PUC the nature of the utility's program and the energy savings resulting from that program on or before March 15, 2010, or within 90 days of having collected a year's worth of data, and each March 15, or one year from the last reporting date, thereafter, up to and including March 15, 2014. The bill would require the PUC, using an experimental design, as defined, to evaluate the information supplied by electrical corporations and gas corporations relative to their comparative energy usage disclosure programs and to determine the net energy savings that are currently being achieved and which could be achieved through expansion of comparative energy usage disclosure programs. The bill would require the PUC to report to the Energy Commission and the Legislature on the results of its evaluation and any action undertaken by the PUC in response to the evaluation. These requirements would become inoperative on July 1, 2015, and would repeal on January 1, 2016. Under existing law, a violation of the Public Utilities Act or any order, decision, rule, direction, demand, or requirement of the PUC is a crime. Because the provisions of this bill are within the act and a violation of the bill's requirements would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program by creating a new crime. (2) The Warren-Alquist State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Act establishes the Energy Commission and requires it to prepare an integrated energy policy report on or before November 1, 2003, and every 2 years thereafter. Existing law requires the Energy Commission, on or before November 1, 2007, and every 3 years thereafter, in consultation with the PUC and local publicly owned electric utilities, in a public process that allows input from other stakeholders, to develop a statewide estimate of all potentially achievable cost-effective electricity and natural gas efficiency savings and establish statewide annual targets for energy efficiency savings and demand reduction over 10 years. Existing law requires the Energy Commission to include in the integrated energy policy report, for each electrical corporation and each gas corporation, a comparison of the public utility's annual energy efficiency targets, and the public utility's actual energy efficiency savings and demand reductions. Existing law requires each local publicly owned electric utility, as defined, in procuring energy, to first acquire all available energy efficiency and demand reduction resources that are cost effective, reliable, and feasible. Existing law requires each local publicly owned electric utility to report annually to its customers and to the Energy Commission its investment in energy efficiency and demand reduction programs, as specified. Existing law requires a local publicly owned electric utility, on or before June 1, 2007, and every 3 years thereafter, to identify all potentially achievable cost-effective electricity efficiency savings and to establish annual targets for energy efficiency savings and demand reduction over 10 years. Existing law requires a local publicly owned electric utility to report those targets to the Energy Commission within 60 days of the date of adoption. This bill would require each local publicly owned electric utility having an active comparative electricity usage disclosure program, as defined, to report to the Energy Commission the nature of the utility's program and the energy savings resulting from that program on or before March 15, 2010, or within 90 days of having collected a year's worth of data, and each March 15, or one year from the last reporting date, thereafter, up to and including, March 15, 2014. The bill would authorize the Energy Commission to request information from a local publicly owned electric utility that the Energy Commission determines is needed to evaluate the potentially achievable cost-effective electricity efficiency savings achievable through an expansion or statewide deployment of comparative electricity usage disclosure programs. The bill would authorize the PUC, for comparison purposes in performing the above-described evaluation, to request that the Energy Commission supply the PUC with the information supplied by a local publicly owned electric utility about its comparative electricity usage disclosure program. These requirements would become inoperative on July 1, 2015, and would repeal on January 1, 2016. This bill would require that the Energy Commission, in developing a statewide estimate of all potentially achievable cost-effective electricity and natural gas efficiency savings and establishing targets for statewide annual energy efficiency savings and demand reduction, to consider the information supplied relative to comparative energy or electricity usage disclosure programs. (3) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Bill Text
- Chaptered 10/11/09 - Chaptered Current pdf October 11, 2009
- Enrolled 09/10/09 - Enrolled pdf September 10, 2009
- Amended 08/31/09 - Amended Assembly pdf August 31, 2009
- Amended 08/17/09 - Amended Assembly pdf August 17, 2009
- Amended 07/15/09 - Amended Assembly pdf July 15, 2009
- Amended 06/15/09 - Amended Assembly pdf June 15, 2009
- Amended 05/28/09 - Amended Senate pdf May 28, 2009
- Amended 05/20/09 - Amended Senate pdf May 20, 2009
- Amended 05/05/09 - Amended Senate pdf May 05, 2009
- Amended 04/14/09 - Amended Senate pdf April 14, 2009
- Introduced 02/26/09 - Introduced pdf February 26, 2009
- SB488 View text html
Action History
-
Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 352, Statutes of 2009.
-
Approved by Governor.
-
Enrolled. To Governor at 1 p.m.
-
Senate concurs in Assembly amendments. (Ayes 34. Noes 4. Page 2286.) To enrollment.
-
In Senate. To unfinished business.
-
Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 68. Noes 6. Page 2934.) To Senate.
-
Read second time. To third reading.
-
Read second time. Amended. To second reading.
-
(Heard in committee on August 27.)
-
From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 15. Noes 1.)
-
Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. suspense file.
-
From committee with author's amendments. Read second time. Amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
-
Read second time. Amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
-
(Heard in committee on July 6.)
-
From committee: Do pass as amended, but first amend, and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 13. Noes 0.)
-
Set, first hearing. Hearing canceled at the request of author.
-
From committee with author's amendments. Read second time. Amended. Re-referred to Com. on U. & C.
-
To Com. on U. & C.
-
In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk.
-
Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 34. Noes 3. Page 1101.) To Assembly.
-
Read second time. Amended. To third reading.
-
From committee: Be placed on second reading file pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8 and be amended.
-
From committee with author's amendments. Read second time. Amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
-
Set for hearing May 26.
-
Read second time. Amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
-
From committee: Do pass as amended, but first amend, and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 11. Noes 0. Page 700.)
-
Set for hearing April 27.
-
Set, first hearing. Hearing canceled at the request of author.
-
From committee with author's amendments. Read second time. Amended. Re-referred to Com. on E., U., & C.
-
Set for hearing April 21.
-
To Com. on E., U. & C.
-
From print. May be acted upon on or after March 28.
-
Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.
Sponsors
- Pavley · Primary
Sponsorship breakdown
Export CSV (upgrade) →1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on · 1 voted No
Sponsors (1)
- Pavley
Co-sponsors (0)
None.
Not signed on (121)
121 members have not signed on to this bill.
Show all 121 →"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.
Votes
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 32 | 4 | 0 | 2 |
| Democratic | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 35 | 4 | 0 | 2 |
| % of votes cast | 85% | 10% | 0% | 5% |
How each member voted (41)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Yee | — | Yea |
| Cedillo | — | Yea |
| Cogdill | — | Yea |
| Corbett | — | Yea |
| Hancock | — | Yea |
| Hollingsworth | — | Nay |
| Huff | — | Yea |
| Kehoe | — | Yea |
| Lowenthal | — | Yea |
| Negrete | — | Yea |
| Runner | — | Yea |
| Ducheny | — | Not Voting |
| Leno | — | Yea |
| Liu | — | Yea |
| McLeod | — | Yea |
| Oropeza | — | Yea |
| Alquist | — | Yea |
| Ashburn | — | Yea |
| Benoit | — | Yea |
| Dutton | — | Yea |
| Pavley | — | Yea |
| Price | — | Yea |
| Romero | — | Yea |
| Simitian | — | Yea |
| Steinberg | — | Yea |
| Walters | — | Nay |
| Wolk | — | Yea |
| Wright | — | Yea |
| Aanestad | — | Nay |
| Harman | — | Yea |
| Maldonado | — | Yea |
| Wiggins | — | Yea |
| Wyland | — | Yea |
| Correa | — | Yea |
| Cox | — | Nay |
| DeSaulnier | — | Yea |
| Denham | — | Yea |
| Florez | — | Not Voting |
| Calderon, Lisa | Democratic | Yea |
| Padilla, Stephen C. | Democratic | Yea |
| Strickland, Tony | Republican | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 74 | 6 | 0 | 5 |
| Democratic | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 80 | 6 | 0 | 5 |
| % of votes cast | 88% | 7% | 0% | 5% |
How each member voted (91)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Carter | — | Yea |
| Chesbro | — | Yea |
| Conway | — | Yea |
| Bill | — | Yea |
| Tom | — | Yea |
| Charles | — | Yea |
| De | — | Yea |
| La | — | Yea |
| Torre | — | Yea |
| De | — | Yea |
| Leon | — | Yea |
| Ammiano | — | Yea |
| Beall | — | Yea |
| Blakeslee | — | Yea |
| Cook | — | Yea |
| Emmerson | — | Yea |
| Fletcher | — | Yea |
| Fong | — | Yea |
| Bonnie | — | Yea |
| Lowenthal | — | Yea |
| V. | — | Yea |
| Manuel | — | Yea |
| Perez | — | Yea |
| John | — | Yea |
| A. | — | Yea |
| Perez | — | Yea |
| Portantino | — | Yea |
| Salas | — | Yea |
| Saldana | — | Yea |
| Audra | — | Yea |
| DeVore | — | Yea |
| Duvall | — | Yea |
| Feuer | — | Yea |
| Fuentes | — | Yea |
| Fuller | — | Yea |
| Bass | — | Yea |
| Galgiani | — | Yea |
| Garrick | — | Nay |
| Hagman | — | Yea |
| Hall | — | Not Voting |
| Harkey | — | Yea |
| Hayashi | — | Yea |
| Hill | — | Yea |
| Huber | — | Yea |
| Huffman | — | Yea |
| Jeffries | — | Yea |
| Krekorian | — | Yea |
| Lieu | — | Yea |
| Mendoza | — | Yea |
| Miller | — | Yea |
| Monning | — | Yea |
| Nava | — | Yea |
| Nestande | — | Not Voting |
| Ruskin | — | Yea |
| Skinner | — | Yea |
| Solorio | — | Yea |
| Swanson | — | Yea |
| Torres | — | Yea |
| Torrico | — | Yea |
| Tran | — | Yea |
| Adams | — | Yea |
| Anderson | — | Nay |
| Block | — | Yea |
| Blumenfield | — | Yea |
| Brownley | — | Yea |
| Buchanan | — | Not Voting |
| Hernandez | — | Yea |
| Knight | — | Nay |
| Logue | — | Not Voting |
| Ma | — | Yea |
| Nielsen | — | Nay |
| Silva | — | Yea |
| Smyth | — | Yea |
| Torlakson | — | Yea |
| Villines | — | Not Voting |
| Coto | — | Yea |
| Eng | — | Yea |
| Evans | — | Yea |
| Davis | — | Yea |
| Yamada | — | Yea |
| Furutani | — | Yea |
| Gilmore | — | Nay |
| Beth Gaines | — | Nay |
| Bill Berryhill | — | Yea |
| Bill Berryhill | — | Yea |
| Arambula, Joaquin | Democratic | Yea |
| Caballero, Anna M. | Democratic | Yea |
| Calderon, Lisa | Democratic | Yea |
| Jones, Brian W. | Republican | Yea |
| Niello, Roger W. | Republican | Yea |
| Strickland, Tony | Republican | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 18 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| Democratic | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 20 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| % of votes cast | 91% | 5% | 0% | 5% |
How each member voted (22)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Hall | — | Yea |
| Charles | — | Yea |
| De | — | Yea |
| Leon | — | Yea |
| John | — | Yea |
| A. | — | Yea |
| Perez | — | Yea |
| Audra | — | Yea |
| Fuentes | — | Yea |
| Conway | — | Yea |
| Hill | — | Yea |
| Miller | — | Yea |
| Nielsen | — | Nay |
| Solorio | — | Yea |
| Torlakson | — | Yea |
| Ammiano | — | Yea |
| Coto | — | Yea |
| Harkey | — | Not Voting |
| Skinner | — | Yea |
| Davis | — | Yea |
| Calderon, Lisa | Democratic | Yea |
| Strickland, Tony | Republican | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 14 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Total | 14 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| % of votes cast | 88% | 0% | 0% | 13% |
How each member voted (16)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Carter | — | Yea |
| Fuentes | — | Yea |
| Tom | — | Yea |
| Furutani | — | Yea |
| Fong | — | Yea |
| Duvall | — | Not Voting |
| Huffman | — | Yea |
| Krekorian | — | Yea |
| Skinner | — | Yea |
| Swanson | — | Yea |
| Torrico | — | Yea |
| Buchanan | — | Yea |
| Smyth | — | Yea |
| Villines | — | Yea |
| Fuller | — | Not Voting |
| Bill Berryhill | — | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 32 | 3 | 0 | 2 |
| Democratic | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 35 | 3 | 0 | 2 |
| % of votes cast | 88% | 8% | 0% | 5% |
How each member voted (40)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Yee | — | Yea |
| Wyland | — | Yea |
| Cedillo | — | Yea |
| Corbett | — | Yea |
| Dutton | — | Yea |
| Hancock | — | Yea |
| Leno | — | Yea |
| Lowenthal | — | Yea |
| Negrete | — | Yea |
| Runner | — | Yea |
| Benoit | — | Yea |
| Liu | — | Yea |
| McLeod | — | Yea |
| Oropeza | — | Yea |
| Romero | — | Yea |
| Steinberg | — | Yea |
| Wiggins | — | Yea |
| Wright | — | Yea |
| Ducheny | — | Not Voting |
| Florez | — | Not Voting |
| Hollingsworth | — | Nay |
| Aanestad | — | Nay |
| Alquist | — | Yea |
| Ashburn | — | Yea |
| Harman | — | Yea |
| Huff | — | Yea |
| Kehoe | — | Yea |
| Maldonado | — | Yea |
| Pavley | — | Yea |
| Simitian | — | Yea |
| Walters | — | Nay |
| Wolk | — | Yea |
| Cogdill | — | Yea |
| Correa | — | Yea |
| Cox | — | Yea |
| DeSaulnier | — | Yea |
| Denham | — | Yea |
| Calderon, Lisa | Democratic | Yea |
| Padilla, Stephen C. | Democratic | Yea |
| Strickland, Tony | Republican | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Democratic | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Unaffiliated | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 11 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (11)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Corbett | — | Yea |
| Cox | — | Yea |
| Simitian | — | Yea |
| Wiggins | — | Yea |
| Benoit | — | Yea |
| Kehoe | — | Yea |
| Wright | — | Yea |
| Calderon, Lisa | Democratic | Yea |
| Lowenthal, Josh | Democratic | Yea |
| Padilla, Stephen C. | Democratic | Yea |
| Strickland, Tony | Republican | Yea |
Subjects
Frequently asked questions
- What does SB 488 do?
- (1) Under existing law, the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) has regulatory authority over public utilities, including electrical corporations and gas corporations, as defined. The existing Public Utilities Act requires the PUC to review and adopt a procurement plan for each electrical corporation. The act requires the PUC, in consultation with the State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission (Energy Commission) , to identify all potentially achievable cost-effective electricity efficiency savings and to establish efficiency targets for an electrical corporation to achieve pursuant to its procurement plan. The act requires that an electrical corporation's procurement plan include a showing that the electrical corporation will first meet its unmet resource needs through all available energy efficiency and demand reduction resources that are cost effective, reliable, and feasible. The act requires the PUC, in consultation with the Energy Commission, to identify all potentially achievable cost-effective natural gas efficiency savings and to establish efficiency targets for the gas corporation to achieve these targets and to require that a gas corporation first meet its unmet gas resource needs through all available natural gas efficiency and demand reduction resources that are cost effective, reliable, and feasible. The act requires each electrical corporation and each gas corporation to disclose on the residential customer's billing statement specified information on usage and cost, and contact information for the PUC's Consumer Affairs Branch, and to make available online to residential customers specified information on usage and energy conservation measures. The act authorizes the PUC to modify, adjust, or add to these requirements as the individual circumstances of each electrical corporation or gas corporation merit, or for master-meter customers, as individual circumstances merit. The act requires the PUC, as part of the general rate case of an electrical corporation or gas corporation, to assess opportunities to improve the quality of information contained in the utility's periodic billings. This bill would require each electrical corporation and gas corporation having a comparative energy usage disclosure program, as defined, to report to the PUC the nature of the utility's program and the energy savings resulting from that program on or before March 15, 2010, or within 90 days of having collected a year's worth of data, and each March 15, or one year from the last reporting date, thereafter, up to and including March 15, 2014. The bill would require the PUC, using an experimental design, as defined, to evaluate the information supplied by electrical corporations and gas corporations relative to their comparative energy usage disclosure programs and to determine the net energy savings that are currently being achieved and which could be achieved through expansion of comparative energy usage disclosure programs. The bill would require the PUC to report to the Energy Commission and the Legislature on the results of its evaluation and any action undertaken by the PUC in response to the evaluation. These requirements would become inoperative on July 1, 2015, and would repeal on January 1, 2016. Under existing law, a violation of the Public Utilities Act or any order, decision, rule, direction, demand, or requirement of the PUC is a crime. Because the provisions of this bill are within the act and a violation of the bill's requirements would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program by creating a new crime. (2) The Warren-Alquist State Energy Resources Conservation and Development Act establishes the Energy Commission and requires it to prepare an integrated energy policy report on or before November 1, 2003, and every 2 years thereafter. Existing law requires the Energy Commission, on or before November 1, 2007, and every 3 years thereafter, in consultation with the PUC and local publicly owned electric utilities, in a public process that allows input from other stakeholders, to develop a statewide estimate of all potentially achievable cost-effective electricity and natural gas efficiency savings and establish statewide annual targets for energy efficiency savings and demand reduction over 10 years. Existing law requires the Energy Commission to include in the integrated energy policy report, for each electrical corporation and each gas corporation, a comparison of the public utility's annual energy efficiency targets, and the public utility's actual energy efficiency savings and demand reductions. Existing law requires each local publicly owned electric utility, as defined, in procuring energy, to first acquire all available energy efficiency and demand reduction resources that are cost effective, reliable, and feasible. Existing law requires each local publicly owned electric utility to report annually to its customers and to the Energy Commission its investment in energy efficiency and demand reduction programs, as specified. Existing law requires a local publicly owned electric utility, on or before June 1, 2007, and every 3 years thereafter, to identify all potentially achievable cost-effective electricity efficiency savings and to establish annual targets for energy efficiency savings and demand reduction over 10 years. Existing law requires a local publicly owned electric utility to report those targets to the Energy Commission within 60 days of the date of adoption. This bill would require each local publicly owned electric utility having an active comparative electricity usage disclosure program, as defined, to report to the Energy Commission the nature of the utility's program and the energy savings resulting from that program on or before March 15, 2010, or within 90 days of having collected a year's worth of data, and each March 15, or one year from the last reporting date, thereafter, up to and including, March 15, 2014. The bill would authorize the Energy Commission to request information from a local publicly owned electric utility that the Energy Commission determines is needed to evaluate the potentially achievable cost-effective electricity efficiency savings achievable through an expansion or statewide deployment of comparative electricity usage disclosure programs. The bill would authorize the PUC, for comparison purposes in performing the above-described evaluation, to request that the Energy Commission supply the PUC with the information supplied by a local publicly owned electric utility about its comparative electricity usage disclosure program. These requirements would become inoperative on July 1, 2015, and would repeal on January 1, 2016. This bill would require that the Energy Commission, in developing a statewide estimate of all potentially achievable cost-effective electricity and natural gas efficiency savings and establishing targets for statewide annual energy efficiency savings and demand reduction, to consider the information supplied relative to comparative energy or electricity usage disclosure programs. (3) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
- Who sponsors SB 488?
- SB 488 is sponsored by Pavley.
- What is the current status of SB 488?
- This bill died with 2009-2010 Regular Session. It reached “To Executive” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
- Where can I track SB 488?
- Track SB 488 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.
Make your voice heard on SB 488
Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.
Stay ahead of SB 488
Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously
One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.
Track this bill →