An employee-ownership fix and 2 more bills become law

From Publius Papers. Three more bills are now law. The President signed them on Oct 15, and Congress.gov posted the signatures the next day, after our last issue went out. Twelve other bills are still waiting on the President's desk. Congress itself was quiet: both chambers held only brief pro forma sessions on Oct 19, with no votes, and House members filed 15 new bills. Below: the three new laws, three notable new House bills, and quick lists of the rest.

See the floor vote and how your members voted on the Retire through Ownership Act at publiuspapers.org

Sponsor: Sen. Roger Marshall (R-KS)
Latest action: Signed by the President, becoming Public Law 119-124 (Oct 15, 2026). The Senate passed an amended version by unanimous consent on Oct 9, 2025, and the House passed it 401–14 (Roll no. 314) on Sept 16, 2026.

What it does: An employee stock ownership plan (ESOP) is a retirement plan in which workers build up shares of their employer's stock and receive the cash value when they leave or retire. When the company isn't publicly traded, there's no market price, so someone has to put a fair market value on the shares. This law says the person responsible for the plan (its fiduciary) may rely in good faith on a valuation from an independent valuation expert or business appraiser who followed IRS Revenue Ruling 59-60, which CRS describes as the factors appraisers should consider when valuing stock in a closely held business. The law doesn't stop the Labor Department from writing rules to interpret this, doesn't expand the department's authority beyond what it had before, and doesn't change fiduciaries' existing duties. It applies to valuations made on or after Oct 15, 2026.

Who it affects: Workers at ESOP-owned companies, business owners who sell shares to an ESOP, plan trustees and appraisers, and the Labor Department.
How the House voted: Democrats 209–0, Republicans 191–14, and the one independent voted yes; 18 members didn't vote. The 14 no votes were Reps. Brecheen (OK), Cloud (TX), Clyde (GA), Crane (AZ), Davidson (OH), Fine (FL), Fulcher (ID), Harris (MD), Higgins (LA), McCormick (GA), Mary Miller (IL), Norman (SC), Roy (TX) and Self (TX).
View on Congress.gov

Sponsor: Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX)
Latest action: Signed by the President, becoming Public Law 119-123 (Oct 15, 2026). The Senate passed it by unanimous consent on July 14, 2025, the House passed an amended version by voice vote on Sept 14, 2026, and the Senate accepted the House changes by unanimous consent on Sept 24, 2026.

What it does: The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and NOAA, working with Customs and Border Protection and the Coast Guard, must jointly develop a standard test, based on chemical analysis, that shows which country a piece of seafood came from. The goal is to help enforcement against illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing and seafood fraud. The test has to meet the needs of federal and state law enforcement, work quickly, fit in a field kit one person can carry, and where practical work on prepared food, including raw dishes like ceviche, sashimi, sushi and poke. Pilot studies come first on red snapper (the law's example of a fish stock that stays in one area) and on bigeye, yellowfin and bluefin tuna (its example of a fish that migrates long distances). Within two years NIST must report to Congress with the method and a plan to put it to use, and explain any parts that turn out to be impractical. (The official CRS summary describes the introduced version, which also let the Defense Department help foreign maritime forces fight illegal fishing. The final text doesn't include that.)

Who it affects: Commercial fishers and seafood importers, restaurants, grocers and diners, federal and state enforcement agencies, NIST, NOAA, Customs and Border Protection, and the Coast Guard.
View on Congress.gov

Sponsor: Sen. Steve Daines (R-MT)
Latest action: Signed by the President, becoming Public Law 119-122 (Oct 15, 2026). The Senate passed it by unanimous consent on Dec 11, 2025, the House passed an amended version by voice vote on Sept 14, 2026, and the Senate accepted the House changes by unanimous consent on Sept 24, 2026.

What it does: A 2010 law ratified the water rights compact between the Crow Tribe and Montana, and it authorized the Bureau of Reclamation to build a municipal, rural and industrial (MR&I) water system on the Crow Reservation. This law repeals that section. Instead, MR&I money that Congress appropriates from now on goes into a new MR&I Projects Account, and the tribe itself must use it first to plan, build, repair or run water production, treatment and delivery systems, including drinking water and wastewater, and to meet related environmental rules. Once those projects are done and the tribe notifies the Interior Department, any money left can be used to buy land on the reservation that comes with water rights. The tribe would own and run what it builds, and the federal government would not pay to operate, maintain or replace it. The Crow Settlement Fund would be invested, with its earnings staying in the fund. The tribe also gets 20 years instead of 15 for its exclusive right to develop hydropower at the Yellowtail Afterbay Dam (CRS says that now runs to 2030). (The official CRS summary describes the introduced version, which also created a separate account for the Crow Irrigation Project. The final text doesn't include that.)

Who it affects: Members of the Crow Tribe and people living on the Crow Reservation in Montana, the Bureau of Reclamation and the Interior Department, and the State of Montana.
View on Congress.gov

Sponsor: Rep. Shontel Brown (D-OH)
Latest action: Introduced and referred to the House Energy and Commerce Committee (Oct 19, 2026).

What it does: It would be a federal crime, punishable by a fine, up to a year in prison or both, to use artificial intelligence or a similar algorithm to intentionally deprive or defraud someone of the right to vote in a federal, state or local election, or to try to. That includes spreading false information about when, where or how to vote or register, who is eligible, how ballots are counted, or who has endorsed whom, and using deception, threats or intimidation to keep people from registering, voting, backing a candidate or working as an election worker. The ban covers companies that build these tools and the businesses and others that use them; an individual acting in a non-commercial context doesn't count as a user under the bill. Anyone covered who publishes AI-made content that fakes or alters a candidate's image, video or voice, or that shows when, where or how to vote, would have to label it "AI Disclaimer: This output was generated by artificial intelligence" or use an "AI"-in-a-circle symbol. Developers would have to give users a way to add the label and, where possible, make it hard to remove. The FTC would write the labeling rules within two years and enforce them, along with a new duty that these tools be "safe and effective."

Who it affects: AI developers, campaigns, platforms and others who publish election content made with AI, voters, election workers, and the FTC.
Odds it moves: Early. It has been referred to committee, and its 30 cosponsors are all from the sponsor's party.
View on Congress.gov

Sponsor: Rep. Robert Menendez (D-NJ)
Latest action: Introduced and referred to the House Energy and Commerce Committee (Oct 19, 2026).

What it does: This bill is about plug-in, or "balcony," solar: movable panels of up to 1,200 watts that plug into a standard 120-volt outlet to cover part of a home's electricity use. They must meet the National Electrical Code and be certified by UL or an equivalent lab. Within a year, state utility regulators would have to begin formally considering, though not necessarily adopting, steps to promote these devices, especially U.S.-made ones (states that already took up the idea are exempt). Those steps include exempting them from grid connection agreements and net metering rules, and barring utilities from requiring approval, insurance, fees or extra equipment. The Energy Department would give states grants for point-of-sale rebates of up to $1,000 for low- and moderate-income households, with priority for renters, apartment residents and communities with high energy burdens. Rebates would only cover devices made in the U.S. with more than 55% of component costs from U.S. sources. States that take the grants must stop landlords from banning tenants who pay their own electric bills from using the devices, including on balconies and patios, though landlords could set reasonable limits. The bill authorizes $100 million a year for fiscal 2027 through 2032. It also calls for a voluntary FTC savings label similar to the EnergyGuide label, and a Consumer Product Safety Commission safety standard within 60 days.

Who it affects: Renters and homeowners, especially lower-income households, landlords, electric utilities and state regulators, solar device makers, and the Energy Department, FTC and CPSC.
Odds it moves: Early. It has been referred to committee and has no cosponsors yet.
View on Congress.gov

For context, here's what a kilowatt-hour costs on average in U.S. cities, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics:

Explore electricity and other average prices in the cost-of-living tracker on publiuspapers.org

Sponsor: Rep. Ben Cline (R-VA)
Latest action: Introduced and referred to the House Judiciary Committee (Oct 19, 2026).

What it does: Registering a copyright would get cheaper and simpler for photographers, illustrators, sculptors and other visual artists. Their works would be exempt from the requirement to send the Library of Congress the "best edition" of a work, and one electronic copy would be enough to register. The Copyright Office would certify private photo registries that keep copies, owner and contact details, and a free searchable database, and a deposit there would count toward registration. A photographer could register up to 3,000 photos in one application with one fee, whether or not they're published, and the Office would have to raise that limit as technology allows. A new "deferred registration" option would cost no more than half the standard fee and would count as an application for import-enforcement purposes at Customs and Border Protection. The Office would also have to offer reduced fees for individual authors and small businesses, yearly subscriptions that cover application fees, and an online system that works with the software creators already use.

Who it affects: Photographers, illustrators, designers, sculptors and other visual artists, people who license their work, the Copyright Office, and Customs and Border Protection.
Odds it moves: Early. It has been referred to committee, and its one cosponsor is from the other party.
View on Congress.gov

As of this morning, Congress.gov shows no signature or veto for any of the 12 bills presented on Oct 14 and 15. By our count, the Constitution's 10-day window (Sundays not counted) runs through Oct 26 for the five presented Oct 14 and Oct 27 for the seven presented Oct 15. A bill the President neither signs nor vetoes in that time becomes law without a signature, unless Congress's adjournment prevents its return.

Each was sent to committee. Where bill text isn't posted yet, the description comes from the official title only.

The Senate met for 30 seconds and the House for two minutes on Oct 19, and the Congressional Record lists no committee hearings. Both chambers are next scheduled to meet on Thursday, Oct 22, again in pro forma session.

Thanks for reading.
The Publius Papers team

Data: Congress.gov API (Library of Congress), pulled Oct 20, 2026, plus the Congressional Record's Daily Digest for Oct 19 and the House Clerk's record of roll call 314. This issue covers actions dated Oct 15–19 that our Oct 16 issue didn't report. The three new laws were signed Oct 15, but Congress.gov posted them on Oct 16. Bills 1–3 are summarized from their enrolled (final) text and official CRS summaries, and where they differ we follow the final text. Bills 4–6 are summarized from their introduced text, since CRS hasn't summarized them yet. Electricity prices are BLS average prices for U.S. cities, not adjusted for inflation. We only include "Odds it moves" when there's a real signal, like a vote, committee action or the cosponsor count.