Your voice matters: practical guidance for petitioning lawmakers and regulators on AI issues
Congress and federal agencies are actively shaping AI regulation right now. Your letter—whether about AI bias in hiring, deceptive AI marketing, algorithmic credit decisions, or AI training data—can influence legislation, enforcement priorities, and regulatory guidance.
When to use: You want new laws, funding, or Congressional pressure on agencies. Examples: "Support the AI Accountability Act," "Hold hearings on AI hiring discrimination," "Press the FTC to enforce against deceptive AI."
Where to send: Your Representative and both Senators via their official contact forms.
When to use: You have a specific complaint about an AI system, or you want agencies to issue rules/guidance. Examples: File FTC complaint about fake AI product, submit CFPB complaint about black-box credit algorithm, comment on NTIA AI accountability proposal.
Where to send: Agency-specific portals (FTC, CFPB, EEOC, DOJ Civil Rights) or Regulations.gov for rulemaking comments.
| Agency | AI Focus Area |
|---|---|
| FTC | Deceptive AI marketing, unfair algorithmic practices, AI-driven scams and fraud |
| CFPB | AI in credit scoring, lending algorithms, "black box" financial models |
| EEOC | AI hiring tools, resume screening, automated interviews, employment discrimination |
| DOJ Civil Rights | AI bias in government services, disability discrimination, civil rights violations |
| NIST | AI Risk Management Framework, technical standards (non-enforcement) |
| NTIA | AI accountability policy, audits, assessments, certifications |
Whether you're a constituent concerned about AI in your credit denial, a startup founder dealing with AI training data scraping, or a business seeing deceptive AI competitors—there's a pathway to make your voice heard. This guide shows you how to structure your letter, who to send it to, and what to ask for.
Congressional staff triage hundreds of constituent contacts daily. Your letter will be read by staff (not the Member personally), but it does matter—especially if you're a clear constituent with a specific ask on a timely issue.
Start with "I'm a resident of [City, State] in your district" or "I'm your constituent in [City]."
"I urge you to co-sponsor H.R. [bill number]," "Please request a hearing on AI hiring bias," "Press the FTC to enforce against deceptive AI claims."
Explain the AI issue: deepfake scams, algorithmic bias, data scraping, black-box credit denials, etc. Include personal or business impact if relevant.
Reference the AI Bill of Rights, recent FTC/CFPB/EEOC guidance, or existing laws (FTC Act, ECOA, Title VII, ADA).
Staff can read and categorize quickly. Longer memos work better as agency comments or technical submissions.
"I am a [constituent / small business owner / startup founder] in [City, State]. I'm writing to ask you to [support Bill X / introduce legislation / press Agency Y to act] regarding [specific AI issue]."
Brief description of the problem: AI-driven hiring discrimination, black-box credit scoring, scraping proprietary data for training, deepfake fraud. Include personal or client impact if applicable.
Reference:
"I urge you to [specific action]. Please let me know how you plan to address this issue. Thank you for your consideration."
Federal agencies handle AI issues through (1) enforcement/complaints and (2) rulemaking/policy comments. Your approach depends on which channel you're using.
Name, location, how the AI system affected you (applicant, customer, user, competitor).
What happened, when, which company, which AI tool/system. Be specific: "Company X's automated credit system denied my application on [date]. The adverse action notice cited 'proprietary algorithm' with no meaningful explanation."
Why this violates the law:
"I request that [agency] investigate this practice and take appropriate enforcement action."
"I'm a [SaaS founder / corporate counsel / AI researcher] with experience in [AI credit models / hiring tech / data privacy]. This proposed rule affects [my business / my clients / the industry]."
Reference page numbers, section numbers, or docket items. "I comment on Section 3.2 (AI audit requirements) and Section 4.1 (transparency obligations)."
Your technical, legal, or practical feedback. Provide evidence, examples, and alternatives. "The proposed audit standard is unworkable for startups because [reasons]. A better approach would be [suggestion]."
For rulemaking, you can suggest alternative wording: "Replace §X.Y with: '[draft language]' to better balance innovation and accountability."
Most federal AI rulemaking comments are submitted via Regulations.gov. Find the docket by keyword ("AI," "NTIA AI accountability," "CFPB algorithmic credit"), then click "Comment" to upload your letter or paste text. Comments typically become public record.
Where to actually send your AI policy letter or complaint—official portals, email addresses, and submission forms.
Use the official directory to find your Rep by ZIP code, then access their contact form:
Directory with links to all Senators' contact forms and phone numbers:
Best for: Deceptive AI marketing, AI-driven fraud, unfair use of consumer data in AI systems, deepfake scams
Where to file:
Online complaint portal for fraud, scams, and unfair business practices. Select category that fits, then explain AI-related harm.
Best for: AI-driven credit denials, algorithmic scoring, "black box" lending models, fintech/neobank automated decisions
Where to file:
Phone: (855) 411-2372 | TTY/TDD: (855) 729-2372
Mention that the decision is based on automated/AI models; CFPB expects creditors to give specific reasons even for complex algorithms.
Best for: AI resume screening, automated video interview scoring, hiring/promotion algorithms that may discriminate
Where to file:
Submit online inquiry → schedule interview → EEOC drafts Charge of Discrimination if appropriate. Explain clearly that decision was made by or heavily reliant on automated tools.
Best for: AI used by government that violates civil rights, algorithmic bias in justice/education/housing, disability discrimination by automated systems
Where to file:
Report a Civil Rights Violation →
Use if AI is being used by a government entity or in a context implicating federal civil rights laws.
Best for: Technical or policy feedback on AI Risk Management Framework, AI standards development
Where to send:
Email: AIframework@nist.gov
For policy/standards feedback, not consumer complaints. NIST publishes AI RMF and technical guidance.
Best for: Policy comments on AI accountability, audits, assessments, certifications
Where to send:
Email: press@ntia.gov | NTIA Contact Page →
For formal rulemaking/RFCs, use Regulations.gov docket instead.
Best for: Submitting formal comments on proposed AI rules, RFIs, RFCs, and other federal dockets
Where to submit:
Search by keyword (e.g., "AI," "NTIA AI accountability"), find relevant docket, click "Comment" to submit text or PDF. Comments typically become publicly visible.
Ready-to-adapt outlines for common AI policy issues. For each scenario: who to write, what to cite, and a sample structure.
CFPB, sometimes FTC; relevant Congressional committees
ECOA, UDAAP, fair lending guidance on AI/ML, adverse action notice requirements for complex algorithms
EEOC, DOJ Civil Rights, relevant Congressional committees
Title VII, ADA, ADEA; EEOC technical assistance and DOJ guidance on AI and disability discrimination
FTC, sometimes state AGs
FTC Act §5 (unfair/deceptive practices), FTC AI business blog guidance, recent enforcement actions
FTC, NTIA, NIST, Congressional tech/privacy committees
AI Bill of Rights (data privacy, safe systems), NTIA AI accountability work, FTC privacy/UDAP authority
Relevant Congressional committees, FTC (deceptive practices), state AGs
AI Bill of Rights (safe systems, notice/explanation), state AG enforcement on deepfakes, FTC deception authority
I draft attorney-quality petition letters to Congress and federal agencies on AI regulation issues. Whether you're a concerned constituent, a business affected by AI practices, or a startup navigating AI compliance, I help translate your concerns into clear, legally grounded advocacy.
I draft polished constituent letters to your Representative and Senators on AI issues—from AI hiring bias to deepfake regulation to training data practices. You review, approve, and send via their official contact forms.
I draft structured complaints to federal agencies about AI-related harms: deceptive AI marketing, black-box credit algorithms, discriminatory hiring tools, civil rights violations. I frame the legal theory and requested action.
For proposed AI rules or policy RFCs, I draft technical and legal comments that cite your expertise, analyze the proposal, and suggest concrete alternatives or improvements.
For issues needing broader advocacy, I draft letters to multiple Members of Congress, coordinate agency complaints, and create submission plans tailored to your AI policy goals.
Initial Consultation: You describe the AI issue, who's affected, and what outcome you want (legislation, enforcement, guidance).
Drafting: I research the relevant laws, agencies, and policy frameworks, then draft a clear, legally grounded letter with specific asks and proper citations.
Delivery: You review the draft, request any edits, then send it yourself (via Congress contact forms or agency portals) or I can send it on your behalf from my firm.
Typical clients: Individuals affected by AI systems (credit denials, hiring discrimination), businesses competing against deceptive AI marketing, startups navigating AI compliance, and organizations advocating for AI accountability.
Use the calendar below to schedule a Zoom call. We'll discuss your AI issue, identify the right recipients (Congress or agencies), and I'll explain how I can help draft your petition or complaint.
Or email directly:
As artificial intelligence rapidly transforms industries, policymakers at federal agencies and in Congress are actively shaping the regulatory framework for AI development and deployment. Businesses, researchers, civil society organizations, and concerned citizens can influence this process by submitting well-crafted policy letters. Whether you're responding to an agency rulemaking, advocating for specific legislation, or raising concerns about AI risks, your letter must clearly articulate your position, provide supporting evidence, and explain the real-world impact of policy decisions. Effective AI policy advocacy combines technical understanding with persuasive communication.
Federal agencies like the FTC, NIST, OSTP, and sector-specific regulators regularly solicit public input on AI policies through Requests for Information (RFIs) and proposed rulemakings. Effective comments should: identify yourself and your relevant expertise or stake in the issue; directly address the specific questions asked by the agency; provide concrete data, examples, or case studies supporting your position; explain the practical implications of proposed rules for affected parties; and offer constructive alternatives if you oppose a proposal. Comments submitted through regulations.gov become part of the public record and must be considered by the agency in its final decision.
Individual letters matter, but coordinated advocacy from coalitions carries more weight. Consider partnering with industry associations, academic institutions, civil society groups, or companies with aligned interests to submit joint comments or letters. Coalition letters demonstrating broad consensus across stakeholders are particularly influential. When possible, combine technical expertise (from researchers), practical implementation knowledge (from industry), and impact analysis (from affected communities) in a single submission. Policymakers are more likely to act when they see agreement across diverse constituencies.