QuorumCivic. Hidden in plain sight Get the app
Bill intelligence
Full Simple

CISA gets internal AI task force, Congress gets biannual briefings—but no new power

H.R. 10752 — CISA Securing AI Task Force Act · Filed by Troy Carter (D-LA) · 1 cosponsor · Introduced Oct 6, 2026 · Referred to committee

92%
Transparency
Typical bill: 85%
8/100
Hidden-provision risk
Typical bill: 15/100
Procedural Coordination Mandate

Your members of Congress

Enter a ZIP to see where your representative and both senators stood on this bill.

Looked up on this device — your ZIP is never stored on our servers.

What it does

This bill requires the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) to establish an internal task force within one year to coordinate efforts on AI safety and security across the agency. The task force will assess existing programs, identify workforce gaps, advise on AI risks, and report to Congress every six months for five years, then automatically expire.

Why we flagged it

The bill establishes an internal task force and reporting requirement within an existing federal agency. It is a structural/procedural measure, not a substantive policy change, regulatory authority, or appropriation.

What the text implies

  • Task force sunset after 5 years means coordination efforts will cease unless Congress reauthorizes; no permanent institutional commitment to AI safety oversight.
  • Biannual reporting requirement creates public record of federal AI deployment and risk assessment, but bill contains no enforcement mechanism if CISA ignores task force recommendations.
  • Bill does not grant CISA new regulatory authority over private-sector AI; coordination is limited to internal agency alignment and interagency collaboration.

Section numbers refer to the bill text the analysis read — linked under Primary records below.

Who it affects

Citizens benefit from increased transparency and coordination on federal AI safety (biannual reporting to Congress), but the bill creates no new regulatory authority, enforcement mechanisms, or public protections—it is purely an internal coordination and reporting mandate. The public interest depends entirely on whether CISA acts on the task force's recommendations.

Named in the bill

Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), Department of Homeland Security (DHS), House Committee on Homeland Security, Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs

Where it stands

1 cosponsor: 1 Democrats.

  • Oct 6, 2026 — Introduced · Congress.gov: “Introduced in House”
  • Oct 6, 2026 — Referred to House Committee on Homeland Security · Congress.gov: “Referred to the House Committee on Homeland Security”

Dates and quoted wording are Congress.gov's action record; the timeline shows status changes, not every procedural step.

How this was measured

Analysis — Quorum's AI read the bill text published by Congress.gov (3,050 characters) on Oct 13, 2026. Section numbers in the findings refer to that text, linked below; transparency and hidden-provision scores are compared against the median of 16,222 analysed bills.

Status and sponsors — Congress.gov's bill record — actions, committee referrals and cosponsors — loaded nightly. The timeline shows status changes, not every procedural action.

As of — page rendered 2026-10-20.

“CISA gets internal AI task force, Congress gets biannual briefings—but no new power” QuorumCivic. https://share.quorumcivic.app/bill/119/hr10752 Report an error

Correlative observation from public records — not evidence of coordination or wrongdoing, and not financial advice.
This page is the record as of today. The app tells you when it changes.
Quorum analysis of the full bill text · 119th Congress · public record

The week in bills

One email, Sunday: what Congress passed, what it changed, and who paid.

One link arrives to confirm the address. It is used for this email and nothing else, and every issue carries an unsubscribe link.