H.R. 10595House bill · 119th CongressIn committee

To subject certain private funds to joint and several liability with respect to the liabilities of firms acquired and controlled by those funds, and for other purposes.

Sponsored byMark PocanD-WI-2Introduced Sep 24, 2026Full text on congress.gov ↗

Latest action (Sep 24, 2026) — on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committees on Financial Services, the Judiciary, and Education and Workforce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.

What it does

not written yet

The Congressional Research Service writes the plain-English summary for every bill, usually a few weeks after it's introduced. This one doesn't have one yet. It will appear here when it does.

In the meantime the most reliable description is the bill's own official title, which is the heading above — written by its sponsor, and the only account of the bill that exists at this stage. The full text is on congress.gov ↗

We don't write our own summaries. Everything else on this site links back to a record you can check, and a description of a bill that came from us rather than from the bill would be the one thing here that didn't — on the page that asks you to take a position on it.

Discussion

5 comments

Sign in to join the discussion and put your vote on the record.

Sort
6
back_cartographerDemoNC-10voted Nay13d ago
Worth reading the sponsor list before deciding — it's less partisan than the framing suggests. I'd want the cost estimate before I'd defend either position.
4
delta_dawn_laDemoHI-2voted Nay13d ago
The summary reads clearly enough, but the enforcement mechanism is doing all the work and it's the part with the least detail. None of that is settled by the summary.
3
steelcityscribeDemoMI-7voted Nay13d ago
Genuine question rather than a gotcha: what does success look like in five years? If we can't say, what are we actually voting on? Someone closer to this than me should say whether that's right.
5
quietriverbendDemoCA-2113d ago
The reporting requirement *is* the guardrail. Once the numbers are public the politics change on their own.
2
pine_ledgerDemoCT-3voted Yea13d ago
Against, and not because the goal is wrong. It stacks a new process on top of two that already don't talk to each other. The committee report would settle it either way.
Your position on H.R. 10595No positions yet