A bipartisan group of House lawmakers introduced legislation on Oct. 29 to revive Congress’ former technology assessment office. It’s an effort to give lawmakers greater access to independent scientific and technical expertise as they develop policies governing cybersecurity, artificial intelligence (AI), and other emerging technologies.
Reps. Mark Takano, D-Calif., Sean Casten, D-Ill., Bill Foster, D-Ill., Don Beyer, D-Va., and Jay Obernolte, R-Calif., sponsored the Congressional Office of Technology Improvement and Enhancement Act, which would rename the defunded Office of Technology Assessment (OTA) as the Congressional Office of Technology and expand its responsibilities to include technical assistance, legislative analysis, and assessments of emerging technologies.
“Congress cannot continue flying blind into the future. We must have an office of independent experts as we face important decisions to guide emerging technology,” Takano said in a press release.
Takano first introduced legislation in 2019 to rename and revive the OTA and its functions. He reintroduced the bill in 2022 alongside Foster, Casten, and Beyer.
The effort also gained bipartisan support in the Senate. In September 2023, Sens. Ben Ray Luján, D-N.M., and Thom Tillis, R-N.C., reintroduced legislation to revive the OTA, and Takano introduced a companion bill in the House.
The current proposal would restore and modernize the OTA, which Congress established in 1972 to provide independent, nonpartisan assessments of scientific and technological developments. Congress defunded the office in 1995. Congress has since relied on other organizations for technical analysis, including the Government Accountability Office (GAO) and the Congressional Research Service (CRS).
The proposal would amend the Technology Assessment Act of 1972 rather than establish an entirely new legislative branch agency. To avoid duplicating existing congressional research capabilities, the office would coordinate its technology assessment activities with GAO and CRS.
“Effective policymaking requires a thorough understanding of the science and technology behind the issues Congress is tasked with addressing,” said Obernolte.
Under the latest proposal, the Congressional Office of Technology would be overseen by the Technology Assessment Board, a bipartisan panel of House and Senate lawmakers that sets research priorities and approves major technology assessments.
Individual lawmakers and congressional committees could request technical assistance without board approval. The office would be required to respond to those requests within 14 calendar days, providing analysis and guidance on emerging technologies and proposed legislation.
The bill would also direct the office to identify emerging scientific and technological trends of national importance through a process known as horizon scanning and communicate its findings to Congress.
To promote bipartisan oversight, the board would be required, to the greatest extent practicable, to balance the number of formal assessments undertaken in response to requests from lawmakers of different political parties.
The office’s director would submit an annual report detailing the distribution and completion of those requests by political affiliation, which the board would make publicly available. The office would also make completed technology assessments public.
The legislation would also authorize the office to temporarily appoint scientists, engineers, and other technical experts from academic, industrial, and research institutions for terms of up to one year, with measures to prevent or mitigate conflicts of interest.
“The Congressional Office of Technology will strengthen Congress’s ability to evaluate emerging technologies by providing independent analysis, timely technical assistance, and long-term assessments of technological developments,” Obernolte said. “Modernizing these resources is critical to ensuring Congress can make informed policy decisions and develop thoughtful, evidence-based legislation that addresses complex challenges without unnecessarily hindering innovation.”