U.S. lawmakers are increasingly confronting how artificial intelligence should be used by their congressional staff, as AI tools become common in everyday office work. While generative AI promises efficiency—helping with research, drafting, and summarizing information—it has also raised concerns about accuracy, accountability, and the erosion of human judgment in legislative processes.
There is no single, unified policy across Congress. Some lawmakers are drafting formal guidelines that outline when AI tools can be used and where they are off-limits, especially in sensitive areas. Others treat AI like any other research aid, allowing its use but expecting staff to independently verify all outputs before relying on them in official work.
A major point of concern is the risk of errors, hallucinations, or biased outputs influencing legislation or constituent communication. As a result, several offices reportedly prohibit AI from drafting legislation, handling confidential constituent data, or generating final policy language. Transparency—knowing when AI has been used—is also emerging as a key expectation in some offices.
Overall, Congress’s response reflects a broader uncertainty shared by many institutions adapting to AI. Lawmakers recognize that banning AI outright is unrealistic, but they are still working to define guardrails that preserve trust, responsibility, and human oversight. The ongoing debate signals that AI governance within government offices is still in its early stages and likely to evolve further in the coming years.
