The bill
ALERT Act
HR. 7613, 119th Congress — read as touching Aerospace (Commercial).
Sponsored by
Rep. Graves, Sam [R-MO-6]
ID: G000546
Follow the money
The bill
HR. 7613, 119th Congress — read as touching Aerospace (Commercial).
The sponsor
Every bill has someone who introduced it. That name is where the paper trail starts.
The money
28 itemised contributions to this sponsor, pulled from FEC filings.
Track this bill's progress through the legislative process
Latest Action
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
April 14, 2026
📍 Current Status
Next: Both chambers must agree on the same version of the bill.
1. Introduction: A member of Congress introduces a bill in either the House or Senate.
2. Committee Review: The bill is sent to relevant committees for study, hearings, and revisions.
3. Floor Action: If approved by committee, the bill goes to the full chamber for debate and voting.
4. Other Chamber: If passed, the bill moves to the other chamber (House or Senate) for the same process.
5. Conference: If both chambers pass different versions, a conference committee reconciles the differences.
6. Presidential Action: The President can sign the bill into law, veto it, or take no action.
7. Became Law: If signed (or if Congress overrides a veto), the bill becomes law!
Another masterpiece of legislative theater, courtesy of the intellectually bankrupt and morally corrupt United States Congress. The ALERT Act, a bill so cleverly crafted to sound like it's actually doing something useful, while in reality, it's just another exercise in bureaucratic navel-gazing.
**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The ALERT Act claims to address aviation safety concerns, specifically collision prevention technology and air traffic control procedures. How noble. But let's not be fooled – this bill is a classic case of "legislative lupus," where the symptoms are treated, but the underlying disease remains unchecked. The real purpose? To create the illusion of action, while lining the pockets of special interest groups and perpetuating the status quo.
**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The bill mandates the use of collision prevention technology in certain aircraft, updates air traffic control processes, and establishes various working groups and task forces. Oh, joy. Because what we really need is more bureaucracy and paperwork. The changes to existing law are merely cosmetic, designed to create a veneer of progress while maintaining the same old corrupt system.
**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The usual suspects: aircraft manufacturers, airlines, pilots, air traffic controllers, and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). But let's not forget the real stakeholders – the lobbyists and special interest groups who will reap the benefits of this bill. The passengers and families affected by aviation accidents? Just pawns in the game of legislative politics.
**Potential Impact & Implications:** The ALERT Act will likely have a negligible impact on aviation safety, but it will certainly create new opportunities for corruption and cronyism. The bill's provisions will be watered down or ignored, while the real issues – lack of funding, inadequate oversight, and industry capture – remain unaddressed. The implications? More of the same: ineffective regulations, bureaucratic red tape, and a continued disregard for human life.
In conclusion, the ALERT Act is a textbook example of legislative malpractice. It's a bill that promises much but delivers little, designed to placate the masses while perpetuating the corrupt system that created the problems in the first place. So, let's give it the diagnosis it deserves: "Terminal Legislative Stupidity" – a disease for which there is no cure, only a never-ending cycle of bureaucratic incompetence and special interest manipulation.
Rep. Graves, Sam [R-MO-6]
Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle
No PAC contributions found
No committee contributions found
This bill has 10 cosponsors. Below are their top campaign contributors.
ID: L000560
Top Contributors
10
ID: R000575
Top Contributors
10
ID: S000510
Top Contributors
10
ID: N000026
Top Contributors
10
ID: C001072
Top Contributors
10
ID: C001087
Top Contributors
10
ID: R000603
Top Contributors
10
ID: M000871
Top Contributors
10
ID: E000235
Top Contributors
10
ID: F000480
Top Contributors
10
Hub layout: Politicians in center, donors arranged by type in rings around them.
Showing 54 nodes and 43 connections (43 secondary connections hidden)
Total contributions: $265,269
Showing top 22 donors by contribution amount
Which industries are materially affected by specific provisions in this bill. 2 helped, 1 harmed.
The bill mandates collision prevention technology upgrades for aircraft, including ACAS Xa and ACAS Xr systems, which will drive demand for avionics manufacturers and aerospace suppliers (e.g., GE Aerospace, Honeywell, Collins Aerospace) that produce these systems. Sections 102, 103, and 104 require rulemaking to equip selected aircraft with integrated collision prevention technology, creating a market for upgrades and new installations.
Title II requires Department of Defense aircraft to equip with collision prevention technology and ADS-B Out, creating contracts for defense contractors like Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, and Boeing's defense division to install these systems on military aircraft. Sections 201-207 mandate safety upgrades for DoD aviation, including risk assessments, transponder maintenance, and flight data monitoring improvements.
Sections 102, 103, and 104 impose costs on airlines to retrofit fleets with ACAS Xa/Xr and collision prevention technology by 2031-2033 deadlines. Section 111 may reduce operational rates at DCA through instrument flight rules allocation limits, potentially decreasing airline revenue. While safety improvements long-term benefit airlines, the immediate financial burden of mandated upgrades constitutes a clear cost.
For each industry this bill affects, here's what the sponsor (Rep. Graves, Sam [R-MO-6])received from donors associated with that industry during the 2022–present cycles. Donations are not proof of intent — they are a record of who funds the people writing the law.