Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
This bill (SKIM Act) directs the U.S. Sentencing Commission to increase offense levels for crimes involving access devices and redefine loss for cases with 10+ counterfeit or unauthorized access devices. It also requires the Attorney General, coordinated with DHS, to report to four congressional committees within 90 days on federal, state, and local efforts to prevent, investigate, prosecute, and sentence access-device fraud, including assessments, statistics, best practices, and legislative recommendations.
Progressives emphasize incarceration and disparity risks from guideline increases.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill combines a focused substantive sentencing-guideline directive with a detailed reporting mandate.
This bill (SKIM Act) directs the U.S. Sentencing Commission to increase offense levels for crimes involving access devices and redefine loss for cases with 10+ counterfeit or unauthorized access devices.
It also requires the Attorney General, coordinated with DHS, to report to four congressional committees within 90 days on federal, state, and local efforts to prevent, investigate, prosecute, and sentence access-device fraud, including assessments, statistics, best practices, and legislative recommendations.
Narrow, administratively focused bill with modest controversy; sentencing changes raise legislative friction and cost concerns, making outcome uncertain.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill combines a focused substantive sentencing-guideline directive with a detailed reporting mandate. The directions to the Sentencing Commission and the enumerated report contents are clear and concrete, and responsible entities and deadlines are identified.
Progressives emphasize incarceration and disparity risks from guideline increases.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Progressives emphasize incarceration and disparity risks from guideline increases.
Generally supports stronger responses to identity and payment-card fraud but is concerned about mandatory guideline increases that raise prison time.
Views the report requirement as a useful accountability tool, but worries about disproportionate sentencing and racial disparities.
Favors better federal-state coordination and targeted sentencing adjustments if evidence supports deterrence.
Wants the Sentencing Commission action to be data-driven and the report used to allocate resources responsibly.
Likely to welcome tougher sentencing and active DOJ/DHS coordination as necessary to deter criminals and protect businesses and consumers.
Sees the bill as strengthening law-and-order responses to kleptocarding and identity misuse.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Narrow, administratively focused bill with modest controversy; sentencing changes raise legislative friction and cost concerns, making outcome uncertain.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Progressives emphasize incarceration and disparity risks from guideline increases.
Narrow, administratively focused bill with modest controversy; sentencing changes raise legislative friction and cost concerns, making outc…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill combines a focused substantive sentencing-guideline directive with a detailed reporting mandate. The directions to the Sentencing Commission and the enumerated report…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.