Lawyers within the House Office of Legislative Counsel (OLC) are reporting an increase in legislative proposals generated by artificial intelligence tools. Current and former officials stated in interviews that these AI-drafted bills often contain technical errors, incorrect legal definitions, and faulty citations of existing statutes. The OLC, a nonpartisan office of approximately 80 employees, is responsible for drafting and reviewing legislation to ensure it accurately reflects a lawmaker’s intent and fits within the existing U.S. Code.
The rise in AI use coincides with a broader trend of increased bill production in the House of Representatives. According to testimony from OLC leader Warren Burke, the office prepared more than 30,000 bills during the previous Congress, nearly triple the number actually introduced. Data shows that by mid-August of the current 119th Congress, 10,081 bills had been introduced, a 70% increase compared to the same period a decade ago. Burke testified in March that reviewing text produced by outside entities—whether human or computer—takes significantly longer than drafting legislation from scratch.
Experts and officials identified several recurring issues with AI-generated bill text. Wade Ballou, who led the OLC from 2016 to 2024, noted that AI often misses nuances such as the legal distinction between tax credits and grants. Other officials pointed out that AI drafts sometimes exclude U.S. territories or tribal nations by using narrow definitions of "states." In June, Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-FL) faced criticism for using an AI tool to generate a summary for an amendment, though she stated the amendment itself was not AI-written.
The scale of this issue is reflected in the workload of the 61 attorneys and 19 support staff at the OLC. During the first 60 days of 2025, the office received 5,623 requests for legislation, a 72% increase from two years prior. As AI tools allow congressional staffers and advocacy groups to generate text at a faster rate, the OLC may face growing backlogs. For a typical household, this could mean delays in the passage of legislation affecting taxes, health care, or federal grants, as nonpartisan lawyers must spend more time rewriting flawed AI drafts to ensure they are legally sound.
The OLC has formed a working group to study how AI might be used safely to improve office efficiency, such as in legal research. The office already uses the Comparative Print Suite, a tool utilizing natural language processing to help staffers visualize how new bills change current law. While this tool is designed to avoid the "hallucinations" or made-up facts common in generative AI, the broader surge in AI-drafted proposals continues to strain resources. The House Subcommittee on Legislative Branch Appropriations will continue to oversee the office's budget and resource needs as bill volumes rise.