Khanna, Ro [D-CA-17]
Democrat · CA · 24 bills sponsored
To establish the America's Living Library Project, and for other purposes.
# America's Living Library Project Bill Summary **What the Bill Would Do:** HR 7832 would establish the "America's Living Library Project," though specific details about the program's exact scope aren't provided in the available information. Based on the title, the project would likely create some form of initiative related to libraries or public access to information across the country. Without access to the bill's full text, the precise mechanisms and goals cannot be detailed here. **Who It Affects:** The bill would potentially affect libraries, library patrons, and communities that rely on library services. Depending on its specific provisions, it could also impact federal funding allocations and library operations nationwide. **Current Status:** HR 7832 is currently in committee, meaning it has been introduced but has not yet advanced to a full House vote. The bill was sponsored by Representative Ro Khanna (D-CA-17). To learn more about this bill's specific provisions and any recent activity, you can search for it on Congress.gov, where you'll find the complete text and detailed legislative history.
To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to impose an annual tax on the net value of assets held by a taxpayer, and for other purposes.
# Summary of HR 7767: Annual Wealth Tax Proposal **What the Bill Would Do** HR 7767 proposes creating a new annual tax on the net wealth (total assets minus debts) of certain taxpayers. Rather than taxing only income, this bill would require individuals above a certain wealth threshold to pay yearly taxes based on their total asset value. The bill amends the Internal Revenue Code, which governs federal income taxes and tax rules. **Who It Affects and Key Provisions** The bill would primarily affect wealthy individuals, though the specific wealth threshold triggering the tax is not detailed in this summary. The proposal represents a significant shift in how the U.S. tax system works, moving beyond traditional income-based taxation to include wealth-based taxation. Supporters argue this could reduce wealth inequality and generate revenue; critics typically raise concerns about implementation challenges, potential economic effects, and constitutional questions. **Current Status** As of now, HR 7767 remains in committee, meaning it has not yet been debated or voted on by the full House of Representatives. The bill was introduced by Representative Ro Khanna (D-California) in the 119th Congress. Bills in committee status often do not advance further, though they may be revised or reintroduced in future legislative sessions.
Stop Wall Street Landlords Act of 2026
# Stop Wall Street Landlords Act of 2026 – Summary **What the Bill Would Do** The Stop Wall Street Landlords Act of 2026 aims to restrict large investment firms and corporations from purchasing single-family homes. The bill would limit Wall Street companies and other institutional investors from buying residential properties, with the intent of keeping homes available for individual homebuyers rather than having them consolidated into corporate rental portfolios. **Who It Affects** This legislation would primarily impact large institutional investors, private equity firms, and corporate entities that purchase residential properties. It would also affect renters and prospective homebuyers by potentially reducing corporate ownership of single-family homes, which sponsors argue could improve housing affordability and availability. Existing homeowners would not be directly affected. **Current Status** As of now, the bill is in committee, meaning it has been introduced but has not yet advanced to a full floor vote in the House of Representatives. The bill was sponsored by Representative Ro Khanna (D-CA) in the 119th Congress. For the bill to become law, it would need to pass both the House and Senate and receive the President's signature.
Epstein Files Transparency Act
# Epstein Files Transparency Act Summary **What It Does:** This law requires the Department of Justice to publicly release all unclassified documents and records related to Jeffrey Epstein's investigation and prosecution. This includes materials about Ghislaine Maxwell (Epstein's associate), flight logs, travel records, and names of individuals connected to the case—including government officials. The DOJ must make these records searchable and downloadable online so the public can access them. Within 15 days of release, the DOJ must also report to Congress what information was released versus withheld and explain any redactions. **Who It Affects:** This transparency measure affects the general public (who gains access to information about the case), crime victims (whose personal information can be protected), government officials named in the investigation, and the Department of Justice (which must compile and release the records). It may also affect ongoing or related federal investigations. **Key Protections:** The DOJ can still withhold certain sensitive information, such as personal details of victims and materials that could jeopardize active investigations. The law balances transparency with protecting vulnerable individuals and ongoing law enforcement operations. **Status:** The bill has been signed into law and is now in effect.
National Worker Cooperative Development and Support Act
# National Worker Cooperative Development and Support Act (HR 5958) Summary **What the Bill Would Do:** This bill would establish federal support for worker cooperatives—businesses owned and controlled by their employees rather than outside investors. If passed, it would create new programs to help people start and develop these cooperatives, provide training and technical assistance, and offer potential financial incentives. The legislation aims to expand an alternative business model where workers have a say in company decisions and share in profits. **Who It Affects:** The bill would primarily benefit workers interested in starting or joining employee-owned businesses, entrepreneurs seeking cooperative business models, and communities looking to develop local economic alternatives. It could also affect federal budgets and agencies tasked with administering new cooperative development programs. **Current Status:** HR 5958 is currently in committee, meaning it hasn't yet advanced to a full vote in the House of Representatives. As a bill in the early legislative stage, it would require committee approval, House passage, Senate approval, and presidential signature before becoming law. No significant action has been reported at this time.
No Coffee Tax Act
# No Coffee Tax Act Summary **What the bill would do:** The No Coffee Tax Act (HR 5516) would prevent the federal government from imposing a tax on coffee or coffee products. While the bill's full details aren't specified in the provided information, its purpose is to protect coffee from potential taxation at the federal level. **Who it affects:** This bill would primarily affect coffee consumers and the coffee industry—including growers, roasters, distributors, and retailers. It would prevent any new federal tax on coffee purchases or products, which could impact government revenue if such a tax were being considered. **Current status:** The bill is currently in committee, meaning it has been introduced but has not yet advanced to a full vote in the House of Representatives. It was sponsored by Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA). Without additional context about what specific tax proposal prompted this bill, it's unclear whether this addresses a concrete threat or is a preventative measure.
To amend title 10, United States Code, to require the Secretary of Defense to annually review the amount of financial assistance for child care and youth program services providers provided by the Secretary.
# HR 5400 Summary **What the Bill Would Do** This bill would require the Secretary of Defense to conduct an annual review of the financial assistance the Department of Defense provides to child care and youth program service providers. Essentially, it would mandate that the Pentagon regularly evaluate and report on how much money it gives to organizations that provide child care and youth services to military families. **Who It Affects and Why It Matters** The bill primarily affects military families who rely on child care services and the providers who offer those services. Military families often face unique challenges accessing affordable child care while serving across different locations. By requiring annual reviews, the bill aims to ensure the Defense Department is adequately funding these critical support services and can identify any gaps or areas for improvement. **Current Status** The bill is currently in committee, meaning it has been introduced but has not yet been voted on by the full House of Representatives. With no additional subject classifications provided, the specific committee assignment is not detailed here.
To authorize the Secretary of Defense to carry out a program to support the defense biotechnology supply chain, and for other purposes.
# HR 5186 Summary **What the Bill Would Do:** HR 5186 would authorize the Secretary of Defense to establish and run a program aimed at strengthening the U.S. defense biotechnology supply chain. While specific details aren't provided in the available information, such a program would likely focus on ensuring reliable domestic sources of biological materials, equipment, or technologies that the military depends on—potentially including vaccines, diagnostics, medical treatments, or other biotech products used by the Department of Defense. **Who It Affects:** This bill would primarily affect the Department of Defense and the biotechnology industry, particularly companies involved in defense-related biological research and manufacturing. It could also indirectly benefit military personnel and national security by improving access to critical biotech resources. **Current Status:** HR 5186 is currently in committee review and has not advanced to a full congressional vote. The bill was introduced by Representative Ro Khanna (D-California) in the 119th Congress. Without additional legislative action, the bill remains in the early stages of the legislative process.
To establish in the Department of Defense a program to support the expansion of domestic bioindustrial manufacturing capacity.
# HR 5187 Summary **What the Bill Would Do** HR 5187 would create a new program within the Department of Defense aimed at helping expand domestic manufacturing of bioindustrial products—essentially goods made from biological materials like plants, microorganisms, or enzymes rather than petroleum. The bill seeks to build up America's capacity to produce these types of products at home rather than relying on imports. **Who It Affects and Key Provisions** The bill would primarily affect biotech companies, manufacturers, and the defense industry, potentially creating new business opportunities and jobs in the bioindustrial sector. By placing this program within the Department of Defense, it frames bioindustrial manufacturing as a matter of national security and economic competitiveness. Though specific provisions aren't detailed in available summaries, such programs typically include funding, research support, or incentives to encourage companies to build or expand manufacturing facilities domestically. **Current Status** The bill was introduced in the 119th Congress and remains in committee, meaning it hasn't yet been debated or voted on by the full House. No further action has been taken at this time.
To direct the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering to issue guidance for private entities on demonstrating how biobased products meet Department of Defense requirements, and for other purposes.
# HR 5191 Summary **What the Bill Would Do** HR 5191 would direct a senior Pentagon official (the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering) to create guidance documents explaining how private companies can show that biobased products—materials made from renewable biological sources like plants—meet the Department of Defense's standards and requirements. In simpler terms, the bill would help companies understand what steps they need to take to sell environmentally friendly, plant-based products to the military. **Who It Affects** This bill primarily affects private companies that manufacture or want to develop biobased products for military use, as well as the Department of Defense itself. It could indirectly benefit the broader economy by making it clearer how sustainable materials can compete in defense contracting. The bill does not appear to create new requirements—instead, it clarifies existing ones. **Current Status** HR 5191 was introduced by Representative Ro Khanna (D-California) in the 119th Congress and is currently in committee, meaning it has not yet been debated or voted on by the full House. The bill's specific provisions beyond the basic guidance requirement are not detailed in available summaries.
To amend title 10, United States Code, to require biennial assessments on the nutrition standards of the military departments, and for other purposes.
# HR 5189 Summary **What the Bill Does** This bill would require the military branches (Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines, and Space Force) to assess and report on their nutrition standards every two years. Essentially, it mandates regular check-ins on what service members are being fed and the quality of military food programs. The bill amends existing military law to make these nutrition reviews a formal requirement rather than something done informally or inconsistently. **Who It Affects** Active-duty military members, military families who eat at base facilities, and the Department of Defense would be most directly affected. The bill ensures military service members have regular oversight of their food quality and nutritional content. It could also impact military food vendors and cafeteria operations that would need to meet assessed standards. **Current Status** The bill was introduced by Representative Ro Khanna (D-CA) in the 119th Congress and remains in committee, meaning it has not yet been debated or voted on by the full House of Representatives. No further action has been taken at this time.
To direct the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to conduct a feasibility study on incorporating militarily-relevant applications of emerging biotechnology into wargaming exercises, and for other purposes.
# HR 5193 Summary **What the Bill Would Do** This bill would require the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (the highest-ranking military officer) to study whether the U.S. military should include emerging biotechnology applications in its war-gaming exercises. War games are simulations the military uses to test strategies and prepare for potential conflicts. The bill essentially asks: should the military practice scenarios involving new biotech capabilities to better understand how they might be used in future conflicts? **Who It Affects and Key Details** The bill directly affects the Department of Defense and military leadership. It would require them to conduct a feasibility study—essentially research into whether this approach is practical and worthwhile—but it doesn't automatically mandate any changes to actual military operations or training. The bill mentions "militarily-relevant applications of emerging biotechnology," though specifics aren't detailed in the title provided. **Current Status** HR 5193 is currently in committee, meaning it's still in the early legislative stage and hasn't yet been voted on by the full House of Representatives. It was introduced by Representative Ro Khanna (D-California) in the 119th Congress.
To expand the contested logistics demonstration and prototyping program to include commercial additive manufacturing facilities in contested logistics environments, and for other purposes.
# HR 5190 Summary **What the Bill Would Do** HR 5190 would expand a military program called the "contested logistics demonstration and prototyping program" to include commercial 3D printing (additive manufacturing) facilities. The bill aims to enable the military to use private-sector 3D printing capabilities in challenging environments where traditional supply chains may be disrupted or threatened—such as areas affected by conflict or natural disasters. **Who It Affects** This bill would primarily affect the U.S. military, defense contractors, and commercial 3D printing companies. By incorporating private manufacturing facilities into military logistics planning, the bill could create new business opportunities for companies in the additive manufacturing sector while potentially strengthening military capabilities in difficult operational environments. **Current Status** As of now, HR 5190 remains in committee and has not been voted on by the full House of Representatives. The bill was introduced by Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA) in the 119th Congress.
To direct the Secretary of Defense to establish blast safety officer positions in the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force, and Space Force.
# HR 5188 Summary **What the Bill Would Do** HR 5188 would require the U.S. Department of Defense to create dedicated "blast safety officer" positions across all five military branches—the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force, and Space Force. These officers would presumably be responsible for monitoring, preventing, and managing risks related to blast injuries and exposure to explosive forces that military personnel face during training and combat operations. **Who It Affects** The bill would directly impact the military branches and their personnel. Military service members, particularly those in combat roles or training environments involving explosives, could benefit from enhanced blast safety oversight. The bill also affects the Department of Defense, which would need to establish and staff these new positions. **Current Status** As of now, HR 5188 remains in committee, meaning it has not yet been debated or voted on by the full House of Representatives. The bill was introduced by Representative Ro Khanna (D-CA) in the 119th Congress. No further action has been taken, so it has not become law.
To modify the annual report on the Navy Shipyard Infrastructure Optimization Program.
# HR 5192 Summary **What It Does:** HR 5192 would change how the Navy reports on its Shipyard Infrastructure Optimization Program. Rather than specifying what changes would be made to those reports, the bill's summary doesn't provide those details. The bill essentially modifies existing reporting requirements that the Navy must follow regarding its shipyard operations and modernization efforts. **Who It Affects:** This bill would primarily affect the U.S. Navy and Department of Defense, which would need to adjust their annual reporting practices. It could indirectly affect naval shipyard workers, military readiness, and communities where Navy shipyards operate, depending on what specific reporting changes are included. **Current Status:** The bill was introduced by Representative Ro Khanna (D-California) in the 119th Congress and is currently in committee, meaning it has not yet been debated or voted on by the full House. At this stage, it remains in the early phases of the legislative process. *Note: Limited details are available about the specific reporting modifications proposed, as the bill's full text would contain those specifics.*
ICBM Act
# ICBM Act Summary I don't have enough information in the data provided to give you a complete summary. The bill details show it's called the "ICBM Act" sponsored by Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA), currently in committee during the 119th Congress, but the specific subjects and provisions aren't listed in what was provided. To give you an accurate summary of what this bill would actually do, who it affects, and its key provisions, I would need access to the full bill text or more detailed legislative information. The acronym "ICBM" could refer to Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles or another policy area entirely, but I can't confirm the bill's purpose from the information available. **I'd recommend checking:** - Congress.gov (search "HR 4685") for the full bill text - The bill's official summary and sponsor statement - House committee documents This will give you reliable, factual information about what the bill proposes.
State-Based Universal Health Care Act of 2025
# State-Based Universal Health Care Act of 2025 - Summary **What the Bill Would Do** This bill would allow individual states to establish their own universal health care systems, rather than having a single national system. If passed, states could opt out of federal health insurance requirements and create state-run programs to provide health coverage to their residents. The bill essentially gives states more flexibility to experiment with different approaches to ensuring that all their citizens have health insurance. **Who It Affects** This legislation would impact everyone with health insurance, as well as uninsured Americans. It would particularly affect residents of states that choose to implement their own universal health care systems. Insurance companies, hospitals, employers, and state governments would also be significantly affected, as they would need to adapt to new state-level rules rather than federal ones. **Current Status** As of now, the bill is in committee (HR 4406, 119th Congress), meaning it hasn't advanced to a full vote in the House of Representatives. Committee members are still reviewing and discussing the proposal before it can move forward in the legislative process.
Prescription Drug Price Relief Act of 2025
# Prescription Drug Price Relief Act of 2025 Summary **What the Bill Does:** The Prescription Drug Price Relief Act of 2025 aims to address high prescription drug prices in the United States. While specific details aren't provided in the basic information available, bills with this title typically focus on allowing Medicare to negotiate drug prices directly with pharmaceutical companies and/or implementing price caps on prescription medications. The bill would primarily affect patients who struggle to afford medications, pharmaceutical companies, and Medicare—the federal health program for seniors and some disabled individuals. **Current Status:** As of now, the bill (HR 3546) remains in committee, meaning it has been introduced but has not yet been voted on by the full House of Representatives. The bill was sponsored by Representative Ro Khanna (D-California). **Note:** For a complete understanding of the specific provisions, you would need to review the full bill text, as the summary here covers only general information. Congressional bills in this policy area often generate debate between those who prioritize patient affordability and those concerned about impacts on drug development and innovation.
Global Fairness in Drug Pricing Act
# Global Fairness in Drug Pricing Act Summary **What the Bill Would Do:** The Global Fairness in Drug Pricing Act would allow the federal government to negotiate drug prices for Medicare beneficiaries more directly, with the goal of reducing what seniors and the government pay for prescription medications. The bill aims to tie U.S. drug prices more closely to the prices paid in other developed countries like Canada, Germany, and Australia, where medications typically cost significantly less than in the United States. **Who It Affects:** The bill primarily affects Medicare recipients (people 65 and older), though it could indirectly impact all Americans by potentially lowering drug costs across the board. It would also affect pharmaceutical companies, which might face reduced revenues if forced to lower prices, and could influence drug pricing strategies nationwide. **Current Status:** The bill is currently in committee, meaning it has been introduced but has not yet been debated or voted on by the full House of Representatives. This is an early stage in the legislative process, and the bill would need to pass committee, a full House vote, Senate approval, and presidential signature to become law.
Drain the Swamp Act
# Drain the Swamp Act Summary I appreciate your request, but I should note that the bill details you've provided are quite limited. The metadata shows this is HR 2857 from the 119th Congress sponsored by Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA), currently in committee, but doesn't include the actual bill text or its specific provisions. **What I can tell you:** Without access to the full bill text, I cannot accurately describe what this legislation would actually do, who it specifically affects, or what its key provisions are. Bill titles alone can be misleading—the actual content determines the real impact. **My recommendation:** To get an accurate, factual summary, I'd suggest checking: - Congress.gov (search HR 2857) for the full text and summary - The bill sponsor's official website - Nonpartisan sources like the Congressional Research Service If you can share the bill text or a reliable summary, I'd be happy to explain it in plain language for a general audience.
Telehealth Coverage Act of 2025
# Telehealth Coverage Act of 2025 - Summary **What the Bill Would Do** The Telehealth Coverage Act of 2025 would expand insurance coverage for telehealth services (doctor visits conducted remotely via phone, video, or online platforms). While specific provisions aren't detailed in the available information, bills with this title typically aim to ensure that health insurance plans—including Medicare and Medicaid—cover virtual care visits at the same rates and under the same conditions as in-person appointments. **Who It Affects** This bill would primarily affect patients seeking remote medical care, healthcare providers offering telehealth services, and insurance companies that cover these services. It could expand access to care for people in rural areas, those with mobility limitations, and anyone preferring remote consultations. **Current Status** The bill was introduced in the 119th Congress by Representative Ro Khanna (D-CA) and is currently in committee, meaning it has not yet been debated or voted on by the full House. No additional legislative action has been taken at this time. *Note: Without access to the full bill text, this summary reflects the general intent suggested by the title. For complete details on specific provisions, consult Congress.gov or the bill's full text.*
Supreme Court Term Limits and Regular Appointments Act of 2025
# Supreme Court Term Limits and Regular Appointments Act of 2025 - Summary **What the Bill Would Do** If passed, this bill would establish term limits for Supreme Court justices, requiring them to serve fixed terms rather than lifetime appointments. The bill would also create a regular schedule for presidential appointments to the Court, ensuring that each president appoints justices on a predictable timeline. This represents a significant change to how the Supreme Court currently operates, since justices have served for life since the nation's founding. **Who It Affects and Key Details** The bill would directly affect Supreme Court justices and future presidents, who would gain more predictable opportunities to shape the Court. It would also impact the Senate, which confirms judicial nominees. The specific terms, transition rules, and appointment schedule would be detailed in the full legislation, though those details aren't provided in this summary. This type of reform would require a constitutional amendment to fully implement, since lifetime tenure for federal judges is guaranteed by the Constitution. **Current Status** The bill is currently in committee (HR 1074), meaning it has been introduced in the House but has not yet advanced to a floor vote. It was sponsored by Representative Ro Khanna (D-CA).
Repeal the TikTok Ban Act
# Repeal the TikTok Ban Act - Summary **What the Bill Would Do** HR 564 would overturn the TikTok ban law that was signed into law in 2024. That ban required TikTok's parent company (ByteDance, based in China) to sell the app to a non-Chinese entity or face a shutdown in the United States. This bill would simply eliminate that requirement, allowing TikTok to continue operating under its current Chinese ownership. **Who It Affects** This bill directly affects the approximately 170 million American TikTok users who could lose access to the app if the ban goes into effect. It also affects TikTok's employees, content creators who earn income through the platform, and advertisers. More broadly, it touches on national security debates between those concerned about Chinese government access to American user data and those who prioritize free speech and open markets. **Current Status** The bill is currently in committee and has not advanced further in the legislative process. Sponsor Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA) introduced it as a way to preserve access to the platform, but it faces significant political hurdles, as lawmakers from both parties expressed national security concerns that led to the original ban's passage.
Extend the TikTok Deadline Act
# Summary of HR 391: Extend the TikTok Deadline Act **What the Bill Would Do:** This bill would extend the deadline for TikTok to divest from its Chinese parent company, ByteDance. Under current law (the Foreign Investment Risk Review Modernization Act amendments), TikTok faced a deadline to sell its U.S. operations or face a ban. This legislation would push back that deadline, giving the company additional time to complete a sale or restructuring deal. **Who It Affects:** The bill would primarily affect TikTok and its roughly 170 million U.S. users. It could also impact ByteDance, potential buyers of TikTok's U.S. operations, and investors involved in any sale negotiations. More broadly, it relates to national security concerns about foreign control of data-collecting technology platforms used by Americans. **Current Status:** As of now, HR 391 is in committee, meaning it has not yet been debated or voted on by the full House. The bill was introduced by Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA) and remains in the early stages of the legislative process.