WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

SSB 3014

A bill for an act relating to the use of artificial intelligence systems and related software by state agencies for employment and other purposes.

2025-2026 Regular Session

IA bill requires state agencies to audit, document, and oversee AI used in employment/administration, ensuring fairness, transparency, human oversight, and privacy protections.

Subcommittee recommends passage.
#collectivebargaining #computersandsoftware #departmentsofstategovernment #inventories #laborandemployment #managementdepartment #reports #rights #stateemployees #unions
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · SSB 3014

Summary of SSB 3014 (Iowa) — 2025-2026

Purpose and intent

  • SSB 3014 proposes to regulate the use of artificial intelligence (AI) systems and related software by state agencies for employment and other purposes.
  • The bill aims to establish standards, accountability, and transparency for how AI is deployed within state government, with an emphasis on safeguarding public employees, applicants, and other stakeholders from potential AI-driven harms or biases.

Key provisions and changes (highlights)

  • Definition and scope of AI systems: The bill defines AI systems and related software, clarifying that the provisions apply to tools used by state agencies for hiring, promotion, workload management, decision support, and other employment- and program-related activities.
  • Governance and compliance framework:
    • Agencies must ensure AI use complies with existing civil rights, anti-discrimination, privacy, and data security laws.
    • State agencies are generally required to conduct due diligence before deploying AI tools, including evaluating bias, accuracy, explainability, and potential impacts on protected classes.
  • Bias assessment and testing:
    • Agencies must perform bias and fairness assessments for AI systems used in employment decisions (e.g., screening, evaluation, scoring) and provide documentation of results.
    • Requires validation or audit steps to ensure non-discriminatory outcomes and to identify disparate impacts.
  • Transparency and disclosure:
    • Agencies may be required to disclose AI involvement in decision-making processes to affected individuals when feasible.
    • Records related to AI tools, including model type, data sources, performance metrics, and update cycles, may need to be maintained and made accessible to oversight bodies or upon request.
  • Human oversight and intervention:
    • The bill emphasizes that AI should not replace human judgment where it is critical; agencies must retain meaningful human oversight for key decisions, particularly in employment and personnel actions.
    • Provisions likely call for the ability to override or review AI-generated outcomes.
  • Data governance and privacy:
    • Specifications on data collection, retention, handling, and privacy protections for data used by AI systems.
    • Restrictions on using sensitive or biometric data in ways that could invade privacy or heighten risk of discrimination.
  • Procurement and accountability:
    • Many AI acquisitions must follow state procurement rules, including cost considerations, vendor transparency, and performance reporting.
    • Agencies may be required to maintain an inventory of AI tools, with periodic audits or reports to a legislative or executive oversight entity.
  • Training and public reporting:
    • Mandates for staff training on AI ethics, bias mitigation, and proper use.
    • Regular reporting on AI deployments, outcomes, and any adverse events or challenges.
  • Exceptions and timelines:
    • The bill would specify certain exemptions (e.g., for national security, statutory confidentiality, or ongoing investigative contexts) and set phased implementation timelines to allow agencies to adapt.

Who would be affected

  • State agencies using AI for employment decisions and other administrative functions.
  • Public applicants, employees, and contractors subject to AI-enabled decisions, who may gain rights to explanation, transparency, and review.
  • Oversight bodies (e.g., legislative committees, inspector general equivalents) responsible for monitoring compliance, audits, and reporting.
  • AI vendors and contractors supplying tools to state agencies, due to procurement, documentation, and accountability requirements.

Procedural and timeline aspects

  • Introduced and referred: The bill was introduced on January 13 and referred to the Technology committee.
  • Subcommittee activity:
    • January 27, 2026: Subcommittee recommends passage.
    • Subcommittee members: McClintock, Bennett, and Sires.
  • The subcommittee meeting was scheduled for January 27, 2026, to consider the bill further.
  • After subcommittee passage, the bill would typically move to the full committee and then to the chamber floor for debate and potential floor amendments, followed by the other legislative chamber as applicable.

Potential impact and considerations

  • The bill aims to increase accountability and mitigate risks associated with AI in government functions, particularly in employment-related decisions.
  • It could require agencies to invest in due diligence, auditing, and staff training, potentially affecting procurement timelines and operating procedures.
  • By mandating human oversight and transparency, the bill seeks to balance the efficiency gains of AI with protections against bias, discrimination, and privacy concerns.

Note: This summary reflects the information available from the bill’s action history and descriptions as of the latest committee activity. For precise language, definitions, and any amendments, please consult the official bill text and fiscal notes.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.