Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Bipartisan bill targets deepfake scams in financial sector

deepfake langague flowing across a screen
Arkadiusz Warguła/Getty Images

Rogers is the “data wrangler” at BillTrack50. He previously worked on policy in several government departments.

IssueVoter is a nonpartisan, nonprofit online platform dedicated to giving everyone a voice in our democracy. As part of its service, IssueVoter summarizes important bills passing through Congress and sets out the opinions for and against the legislation, helping us to better understand the issues.


BillTrack50, which partners with IssueVoter on this project, offers free tools for citizens to easily research legislators and bills across all 50 states and Congress. It also offers professional tools to help organizations with ongoing legislative and regulatory tracking.

Based on our combined work, I will explore deepfake scams in the financial sector.

Following on our in-depth look at artificial intelligence legislation, we're looking at the Preventing Deep Fake Scams Act. Deepfakes are videos of a person that are digitally altered so they appear to be someone else, which creates the possibility of misleading the viewer. Most legislation around deepfakes concerns their use in nonconsensual pornography or to affect the outcome of an election.

This bill is unusual in that it attempts to tackle deepfake use in committing fraud, by establishing the Task Force on Artificial Intelligence in the Financial Services Sector. The task force will explore the benefits to financial institutions as well as the risks to consumer account security and will be chaired by the secretary of the treasury or a nominee. If the bill passes, the task force will be required to produce a report to Congress within a year that will include advice to financial institutions on how to prevent such fraud and also advice to Congress on how to regulate it effectively.

IssueVoter quotes proponents of the bill (the Democratic and Republican sponsors) who highlight the fast-changing nature of the risks that deepfake technology will make identity theft and fraud easier. It also looks at the need for policy makers to understand these risks to be able to create effective safeguards. Opponents of the bill (from the financial sector) cite the benefits and uses of AI to increase productivity and add value, as well as in actually fighting fraud.

The bill was introduced in the House on Sept. 28, 2023, and has been referred to the Financial Services Committee. It's difficult to predict its chances of success, given the current legislative logjam in Congress but, given its bipartisan nature and modest scope, it might manage to become law.

Other AI legislation

Looking at deepfake and AI legislation more broadly, this stakeholder page details 17 of the most interesting pieces of state and federal legislation that actually become law between 2019 and 2022. The National Defense Authorization Act of 2021 requires the Department of Homeland Security to issue an annual report on deepfakes for five years, but with a broader remit than just the financial sector. The first report (from January 2023) serves more as a baseline assessment of the technologies and risks, with more meaty content to come.

On a state level, Virginia was the first to legislate against deepfakes with SB1736 in 2019, with both California and Texas following suit and passing laws prohibiting the use of deepfakes to influence elections. California also passed a law prohibiting the use of deepfakes in pornography without the explicit consent of the subject.

In 2023, many states introduced AI legislation. Here's a stakeholder page detailing deepfakes bills and another setting out bills aimed at regulating their use during election campaigns.

Six states have enacted legislation. Louisiana, Minnesota, New York and Texas have enacted legislation creating offenses for producing and distributing nonconsensual deepfake pornography. Michigan has enacted four pieces of legislation, aimed at creating offenses for distributing deceptive media, regulating campaign advertising, to define artificial intelligence for this purpose and to provide sentencing guidelines. Washington enacted SB5152, defining synthetic media in campaigning and outlines penalties for improper use (for example, where an appropriately prominent disclaimer was not included).

Read More

Veterans’ Care at Risk Under Trump As Hundreds of Doctors and Nurses Reject Working at VA Hospitals
Photo illustration by Lisa Larson-Walker/ProPublica

Veterans’ Care at Risk Under Trump As Hundreds of Doctors and Nurses Reject Working at VA Hospitals

Veterans hospitals are struggling to replace hundreds of doctors and nurses who have left the health care system this year as the Trump administration pursues its pledge to simultaneously slash Department of Veterans Affairs staff and improve care.

Many job applicants are turning down offers, worried that the positions are not stable and uneasy with the overall direction of the agency, according to internal documents examined by ProPublica. The records show nearly 4 in 10 of the roughly 2,000 doctors offered jobs from January through March of this year turned them down. That is quadruple the rate of doctors rejecting offers during the same time period last year.

Keep ReadingShow less
Protecting the U.S. Press: The PRESS Act and What It Could Mean for Journalists

The Protect Reporters from Excessive State Suppression (PRESS) Act aims to fill the national shield law gap by providing two protections for journalists.

Getty Images, Manu Vega

Protecting the U.S. Press: The PRESS Act and What It Could Mean for Journalists

The First Amendment protects journalists during the news-gathering and publication processes. For example, under the First Amendment, reporters cannot be forced to report on an issue. However, the press is not entitled to different legal protections compared to a general member of the public under the First Amendment.

In the United States, there are protections for journalists beyond the First Amendment, including shield laws that protect journalists from pressure to reveal sources or information during news-gathering. 48 states and the District of Columbia have shield laws, but protections vary widely. There is currently no federal shield law. As of 2019, at least 22 journalists have been jailed in the U.S. for refusing to comply with requests to reveal sources of information. Seven other journalists have been jailed and fined for the same reason.

Keep ReadingShow less
Democrats Score Strategic Wins Amid Redistricting Battles

Democrat Donkey is winning arm wrestling match against Republican elephant

AI generated image

Democrats Score Strategic Wins Amid Redistricting Battles

Democrats are quietly building momentum in the 2025 election cycle, notching two key legislative flips in special elections and gaining ground in early polling ahead of the 2026 midterms. While the victories are modest in number, they signal a potential shift in voter sentiment — and a brewing backlash against Republican-led redistricting efforts.

Out of 40 special elections held across the United States so far in 2025, only two seats have changed party control — both flipping from Republican to Democrat.

Keep ReadingShow less
Policing or Occupation? Trump’s Militarizing America’s Cities Sets a Dangerous Precedent

A DC Metropolitan Police Department car is parked near a rally against the Trump Administration's federal takeover of the District of Columbia, outside of the AFL-CIO on August 11, 2025 in Washington, DC.

(Photo by Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)

Policing or Occupation? Trump’s Militarizing America’s Cities Sets a Dangerous Precedent

President Trump announced the activation of hundreds of National Guard troops in Washington, D.C., along with the deployment of federal agents—including more than 100 from the FBI. This comes despite Justice Department data showing that violent crime in D.C. fell 35% from 2023 to 2024, reaching its lowest point in over three decades. These aren’t abstract numbers—they paint a picture of a city safer than it has been in a generation, with fewer homicides, assaults, and robberies than at any point since the early 1990s.

The contradiction could not be more glaring: the same president who, on January 6, 2021, stalled for hours as a violent uprising engulfed the Capitol is now rushing to “liberate” a city that—based on federal data—hasn’t been this safe in more than thirty years. Then, when democracy itself was under siege, urgency gave way to dithering; today, with no comparable emergency—only vague claims of lawlessness—he mobilizes troops for a mission that looks less like public safety and more like political theater. The disparity between those two moments is more than irony; it is a blueprint for how power can be selectively applied, depending on whose power is threatened.

Keep ReadingShow less