Referred to the Committee on House Administration, and in addition to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker,…
This resolution creates a bipartisan commission inside Congress to study how federal data can be used to support evidence-based policymaking and to make recommendations to lawmakers. The commission would have 12 members appointed by House and Senate leaders, a director and staff, and would produce interim reports and a final report by the end of the 119th Congress. It authorizes funding split between the House and Senate to operate the commission. The commission's recommendations are advisory and would not by themselves change the law.
Concurrent resolutions must be adopted by both the House and the Senate but are not sent to the President and do not create binding law; they express the two chambers' agreement and can establish entities within the legislative branch. This resolution requires appointments by House and Senate leaders and directs that funding be provided half from House accounts and half from the Senate contingent fund.
Creates a 12-member, bicameral Commission on Evidence-Based Policymaking to study use of federal data and recommend legislative and administrative changes.
The Commission will produce interim and final reports, may hire staff, consider recommendations by two-thirds vote, and is funded equally by House and Senate accounts.
Technocratic, narrow commission with bipartisan design and modest cost is historically likely to be approved, though procedural Senate issues and appointment politics create uncertainty.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a well-specified commission-authorizing concurrent resolution: it defines purpose, membership, governance, staff and funding authorities, and reporting requirements with clear mechanics appropriate for a congressional study body.
Liberals emphasize program evaluation and equity benefits
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Liberals emphasize program evaluation and equity benefits
Likely supportive because the Commission aims to strengthen data-driven evaluation, improve program effectiveness, and expand Congressional technical capacity.
May press for strong privacy, equity, and data-access protections in its recommendations.
Generally favorable but pragmatic; views the Commission as a useful, bipartisan vehicle to improve legislative information and cost-effectiveness.
Will watch costs, timelines, and duplication with existing efforts.
Skeptical but not uniformly opposed; supports evidence use in principle but worries about federal overreach, privacy risks, and centralizing data power.
Likely to demand strict limits and cost controls.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Technocratic, narrow commission with bipartisan design and modest cost is historically likely to be approved, though procedural Senate issues and appointment politics create uncertainty.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Liberals emphasize program evaluation and equity benefits
Technocratic, narrow commission with bipartisan design and modest cost is historically likely to be approved, though procedural Senate issu…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a well-specified commission-authorizing concurrent resolution: it defines purpose, membership, governance, staff and funding authorities, and reporting requirement…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.