YouCongress
About Sign up

Comment by Amy Bos

Human avatar
Vice President of Government Affairs
Illinois SB 315’s mandatory third-party AI audit requirement creates an impossible compliance burden — there are no recognized auditing standards, certified auditors or established methodologies for frontier model safety audits, yet companies would face penalties up to $3 million for noncompliance by January 2028. [...] Companies cannot comply with auditing standards that do not yet exist.
AI Verified source (May 26, 2026)
Like Share on X 20d ago
Policy proposals and claims
Mandate third-party audits for major AI systems
votes Against
Statement relation verification history AI Verified Report this

Statement relation comments

AI Verified The quote directly addresses a mandatory third-party AI audit requirement and argues against it, calling it an "impossible compliance burden" because standards, auditors, and methodologies do not exist. That clearly implies opposition to mandating third-party audits for major AI systems. · YouCongress gpt-5.4-2026-03-05 · 11d ago
Vote inference verification history AI Verified Report this

Vote answer comments

AI Verified The quote clearly opposes a mandatory third-party audit requirement, calling it an "impossible compliance burden" and saying "Companies cannot comply with auditing standards that do not yet exist." · YouCongress gpt-5.4-2026-03-05 · 11d ago

Quote authenticity verification history

Report this

Quote authenticity comments

AI Verified Verified. The NetChoice page at the provided URL is dated May 26, 2026 and names Amy Bos as the author. It contains the first sentence verbatim in the page summary and the second sentence verbatim in the testimony body: “Companies cannot comply with auditing standards that do not yet exist.” The ellipsis is a faithful omission of intervening text from the same authored source, so the stored quote, author, date, and source URL are consistent with the evidence. ([netchoice.org](https://netchoice.org/netchoice-testimony-in-opposition-to-illinois-sb-315-the-artificial-intelligence-safety-measures-act/)) · YouCongress gpt-5.4-2026-03-05 · 11d ago
Disputed The NetChoice page from May 26, 2026 has the opening passage in its summary, but in the source that sentence continues past the point where your version stops; the later sentence about companies being unable to comply with nonexistent auditing standards appears separately in the body, and the page is signed by Amy Bos for NetChoice. Because the submitted text is a stitched-together excerpt rather than a fully verbatim quote as presented, I classify it as disputed. ([netchoice.org](https://netchoice.org/netchoice-testimony-in-opposition-to-illinois-sb-315-the-artificial-intelligence-safety-measures-act/)) · YouCongress gpt-5.4-2026-03-05 · 13d ago
AI Verified Quote attributed to NetChoice from its "Testimony in Opposition to Illinois SB 315, the Artificial Intelligence Safety Measures Act" (2026). The source_url (netchoice.org) returns HTTP 403 for automated fetch, but a web search confirmed the quote's substance and key wording verbatim: NetChoice argues there are "no recognized auditing standards, certified auditors or established methodologies for frontier model safety audits" and that the mandatory third-party audit requirement creates an "impossible compliance" obligation, concluding companies cannot comply with standards that do not yet exist. Year (2026) and attribution are correct. The "against" vote on "Mandate third-party audits for major AI systems" aligns directly — NetChoice's testimony explicitly opposes the mandatory third-party AI audit requirement and urges removing the audit provisions. Positive evidence confirms accuracy and vote alignment. · Hector Perez Arenas claude-opus-4-8 · 19d ago
replying to Amy Bos