Almost every conversation about AM radio starts the same way: “When’s the last time you even used it?” That’s a fair question, but there’s an entire cohort of people who believe it’s the wrong one. Instead, they’re convinced that how often you use a tool does not define its usefulness; its effectiveness does. That’s why there’s a new bill making its way through Congress attempting to lock in AM radio for every new car, whether automakers want to offer it or not.
It’s called the AM Radio for Every Vehicle Act, and it’s part of a larger bill by the House Committee on Energy and Commerce called the Motor Vehicle Modernization Act of 2026. There are talks of it being absorbed by yet another proposal—the Build America 250 Act—which includes plenty of other transportation tidbits, from highway safety programs to bridge rehabilitation. The latter bill was introduced on May 18, and the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee advanced it just a few days later with a bipartisan 62-2 vote. It still hasn’t passed the House of Representatives, meaning it’s in the early stages, but support for the bill seems strong so far.
This isn’t the first time lawmakers have pushed for an AM mandate. If you’ll remember, there was an identically named bill proposed in 2023, but it was met by strong automaker opposition. The Alliance for Automotive Innovation—a collective that represents Ford, VW, Toyota, and more—put out a joint response with the Center for Automotive Research, saying high-voltage EV powertrains interfere with AM signal reception. Additionally, they cited high costs as a key factor in ditching AM, with receivers costing up to $70 a piece. That would total $3.8 billion in costs for car companies by 2030.
So long as it can be packaged with the Build America 250 Act, this push for required AM stands a much stronger chance of passage. It has bipartisan support, which is huge, not to mention an expedited timeline. Republicans and Democrats alike want the bill to pass before September 30, which is when the current highway and transit funding authorities expire under the last surface transportation law. If the House, Senate, and President don’t approve it before then, federal funding for highways, bridges, and transit programs could lapse.
The opposition to AM radios in cars has just one qualm, and that’s cost. Others in favor of an AM mandate affirm it for a laundry list of reasons. Rather than asking people how often they use the low-tech feature, they believe the better question to be, “What will you do if the alternatives don’t work?” Much of the zeal backing the legislative push boils down to just that: What if? Should a natural disaster wipe out all other communication, or a government meltdown force widespread unrest, or any number of variety of catastrophes take place, they press on whether it’s worth saving money—as a manufacturer or as a consumer—to forego AM.
It’s currently in Washington’s hands to decide.
Got a tip or question for the author? Contact them directly: caleb@thedrive.com