Issue · Technology

Technology

Every technology bill, vote, and legislator stance in California, automatically classified by Maddy, our AI policy reader.

Total bills
2
2025-2026 Regular Session
Top supporter
Josh Becker
100% support rate
Top opponent
Brian Jones
2% support rate
Ranked legislators
10
5 support · 5 oppose
Key legislators

Who's moving technology in California

Legislators moving technology in California
Legislator Party Stance Support rate Votes
Josh Becker
Josh Becker Senate · District 13
D
Strong +
100% 383
Bob Archuleta
Bob Archuleta Senate · District 30
D
Strong +
98% 415
Caroline Menjivar
Caroline Menjivar Senate · District 20
D
Strong +
98% 422
Susan Rubio
Susan Rubio Senate · District 22
D
Strong +
98% 375
Catherine Blakespear
Catherine Blakespear Senate · District 38
D
Strong +
98% 403
Brian Jones
Brian Jones Senate · District 40
R
Strong −
2% 334
Marie Alvarado-Gil
Marie Alvarado-Gil Senate · District 4
R
Strong −
4% 329
Steve Choi
Steve Choi Senate · District 37
R
Strong −
6% 381
Tony Strickland
Tony Strickland Senate · District 36
R
Strong −
6% 405
Kelly Seyarto
Kelly Seyarto Senate · District 32
R
Strong −
7% 619
Showing 2 of 2 bills

All technology bills

passed · California · Assembly Aug 13, 2026

AB 311: Consumer Driving Data Protection Act of 2026.

The Insurance Rate Reduction and Reform Act of 1988, an initiative measure enacted by Proposition 103, as approved by the voters at the November 8, 1988, statewide general election, prohibits specified insurance rates from being approved or remaining in effect that are excessive, inadequate, unfairly discriminatory, or otherwise in violation of the act. Under the act, rates and premiums for automobile insurance are determined based on specified factors, including the insured's driving safety record. Existing law authorizes the provisions of Proposition 103 to be amended by a statute that furthers the purposes of the act and is enacted by the Legislature with a 23 vote. This bill, the Consumer Driving Data Protection Act of 2026, would authorize a consumer to opt to use telematics to establish their driving record, thus amending Proposition 103. The bill would prohibit the use of telematics data for a purpose other than rating private passenger automobile insurance. The bill would require a rate application under which telematics would be used to establish an insured's driving record to include specified materials related to the insurer's telematics program. This bill would prohibit an insurer that uses telematics from taking specified actions, including conditioning eligibility for a discount upon participation in a telematics program, unless the discount is approved by the commissioner. The bill would also set forth written consent and privacy requirements for the collection and use of telematics data. The bill would authorize the commissioner to impose specified penalties for violations of the bill's provisions, including civil penalties and suspension of an insurer's telematics program. This bill would require an insurance provider or third-party vendor to take specified actions with respect to the telematics data, including immediately deleting the data once a rating has been assigned to the consumer and obtaining an express written or electronic signature of a consumer on a notice meeting specified conditions. The bill would additionally prohibit an insurance provider or third-party vendor from keeping the telematics data for longer than 6 months and collecting audio or visual recordings of the occupants of the vehicle or persons outside the vehicle, among other specified prohibitions. The bill would declare that its provisions further the purposes of Proposition 103. Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest. This bill would make legislative findings to that effect.
signed · California · Assembly Oct 13, 2025

AB 316: Artificial intelligence: defenses.

Existing law provides that everyone is responsible not only for the result of their willful acts, but also for an injury occasioned to another by their want of ordinary care or skill in the management of their property or person. Existing law requires the developer of a generative artificial intelligence system or service that is released on or after January 1, 2022, and made publicly available to Californians for use, to post on the developer's internet website documentation regarding the data used by the developer to train the generative artificial intelligence system or service. Existing law defines "artificial intelligence" for these purposes. This bill would prohibit a defendant who developed, modified, or used artificial intelligence, as defined, from asserting a defense that the artificial intelligence autonomously caused the harm to the plaintiff.