FCC must report on 911 access compliance in office phone systems

What it does

This bill requires the Federal Communications Commission to publish a report within 180 days on how well manufacturers and vendors of multi-line telephone systems (like office phone systems) are complying with Kari's Law—a 2017 law requiring these systems to allow users to dial 911 directly without an access code. The report must assess compliance, identify obstacles, suggest enforcement improvements, and recommend any additional legislation needed.

Why we flagged it

The bill's sole operative mechanism is a transparency and accountability mandate—requiring the FCC to assess compliance with an existing emergency-access law and report findings to Congress and the public. It is a straightforward oversight and reporting instrument.

What the text implies

• Report may expose systematic non-compliance by major phone-system vendors, potentially triggering enforcement actions or recalls affecting business operations.
• Recommendations to Congress could lead to stricter regulations, penalties, or mandatory technical standards for multi-line systems, raising compliance costs for manufacturers.
• Transparency on enforcement gaps may empower state attorneys general or private litigants to pursue separate enforcement actions against non-compliant vendors.

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

Who it affects

The bill creates transparency and accountability around emergency-access protections that directly affect public safety. By requiring the FCC to assess compliance and recommend improvements, it enables Congress and the public to identify and fix gaps in a law designed to save lives in emergencies.

Named in the bill

Federal Communications Commission (FCC), Multi-line telephone system manufacturers and vendors, Kari's Law Act of 2017, Communications Act of 1934, Section 721

Where it stands

2 cosponsors: 1 Democrats, 1 Republicans.

• Sep 8, 2025 — Introduced · Congress.gov: “Introduced in House”
• Sep 8, 2025 — Referred to House Committee on Energy and Commerce and Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation · Congress.gov: “Referred to the Subcommittee on Communications and Technology”
• Jan 15, 2026 — Markup held in committee · Congress.gov: “Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held”
• Mar 26, 2026 — Reported out of committee · Congress.gov: “Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 495”
• Apr 20, 2026 — Floor vote scheduled · Congress.gov: “Mr. Allen moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill”
• Apr 21, 2026 — Passed the House · Congress.gov: “On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 405 - 5…”

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

Money around this bill

1 lobbying clients named this bill on 1 disclosure filings across 1 quarter, Jun 2026 to Jun 2026. Those filings disclosed $50,000 in lobbying spend. A filing names 85 bills on average, so that figure is what each filing reported, not a share belonging to this bill.

More lobbying clients named this bill than 0% of bills with at least one filing.

Doris Matsui, the sponsor, reported $1,026,688 in PAC receipts in the 2026 cycle.

• Peace Officers Research Association of California — $50,000 on 1 filing

Lobbying Disclosure Act filings through Jul 19, 2026. A filing shows who paid to lobby on a bill it names, not what changed.