H.R. 915House bill · 119th CongressIn the SenateCommerce

Small Business Technological Advancement Act

Sponsored byMark AlfordR-MO-4Introduced Feb 4, 2025Full text on congress.gov ↗

Latest action (Jul 13, 2026) Received in the Senate and Read twice and on Small Business and Entrepreneurship.

What it does

Congressional Research Service, Jun 3, 2026

Small Business Technological Act of 2025

This bill authorizes the Small Business Administration (SBA) to finance under the 7(a) loan program business software or cloud computing services that facilitate business operations, product or service delivery, payroll processing, human resources functions, sales and billing functions, or accounting or tracking of inventory. Such software or services include business tools that utilize artificial intelligence.

The 7(a) loan program is the SBA's primary business loan program that provides loan guaranties for participating lenders to provide financing to small businesses that are otherwise unable obtain reasonable credit terms.

Face Value

as passed the House
100Narrow

How much of this bill its name accounts for.

  • Every bill starts at100
  • Nothing counted against it: one area of law, and short enough that length doesn't register.

Face Value measures reach, not honesty. A big bill can be accurately named, and a low score is not an accusation — it means the contents reach further than any short title could describe. Count it yourself ↗ How this is worked out

What Congress did

1 recorded
  • On , as Amendeddecisive vote

    House · Jun 24, 2026

    A fast-track vote: no amendments, short debate, and two thirds needed to pass. Used for bills expected to be uncontroversial.

    4144

    Passed

    Every vote →

Discussion

10 comments

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

Sort
20
cecilia_ruizDemoMI-3voted Yea27d ago
The plain-English summary is clearer than most, and the core mechanism seems sound. My question is enforcement — who actually checks that this happens?
7
notmyfirstrodeoDemoCO-1voted Nay19d ago
That's the part I can't get past either. The authority is broad and the guardrails are thin.
9
district_watcherDemoTX-27voted Yea19d ago
Reading the summary, this looks like it mostly codifies what agencies are already doing informally. That's worth doing — informal practice evaporates when administrations change.
1
sam_whitfieldDemoMD-7voted Yea24d ago
Agreed on the substance, disagree on the timing. Doing this badly now makes doing it well later harder.
2
rustbelt_rayDemoLA-2voted Nay20d ago
Honest question, not a gotcha: what would change your mind on this?
9
JMTanakaDemoTX-1voted Yea21d ago
Does anyone have the CBO score on this? The summary is silent on cost and that's usually the whole argument.
6
cecilia_ruizDemoMI-3voted Yea25d ago
This is the kind of unglamorous plumbing that never makes the news and matters more than the stuff that does.
7
PlainsVoterDemoIL-7voted Yea23d ago
I'd add that the states already doing this haven't seen the effects the opponents predicted. That's some evidence.
2
notmyfirstrodeoDemoCO-1voted Nay19d ago
Against. I've seen this pattern before: a pilot programme with an authorisation that quietly becomes permanent at the next reauthorisation.
5
SierraTrailDemoCA-12voted Yea25d ago
Counterpoint: the reporting requirement is the guardrail. Once the numbers are public the politics change on their own.
Your position on H.R. 91554% Yea · 24 VoteWire users