News

Washington, D.C. — House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA), Full Committee Ranking Member Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-NJ), Innovation, Data, and Commerce Subcommittee Chair Gus Bilirakis (R-FL), and Subcommittee Ranking Member Jan Schakowsky (D-IL) wrote to Meta and other online marketplaces today requesting information regarding efforts to end the sale of banned and recalled hazardous products on their platforms. KEY EXCERPTS FROM THE LETTER TO META: “The U. S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) is tasked with keeping the public safe from consumer products that pose an unreasonable risk of injury or death. In addition to its own work, the CPSC relies on online marketplaces, like Meta, to keep consumers safe by preventing the posting for sale of products that are known to be dangerous. It is our understanding that Meta has been falling short on this mission.” […] “Meta’s failure to prevent recalled products from being posted for sale on its platform has resulted in your users and their children being placed at risk of purchasing and using a product that CPSC has found to pose a serious risk of injury and potential death.” BACKGROUND: The Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) relies on online marketplaces to keep people safe by proactively preventing the sale of products that are known to be dangerous.  Recent reports suggest that at least one platform, Meta, has fallen short of that responsibility, despite numerous takedown requests from CPSC. CPSC has issued takedown requests to various platforms, including several takedown requests for recalled products related to infant deaths. CPSC has formally issued an approximately one thousand take down requests a month for these products. To date, the volume of takedown requests has not slowed, and CPSC staff is unaware of any proactive measures by the platform in question  to prevent these postings in the future. This lapse has resulted in thousands of users and their children being put at risk of using a product that has been found to pose serious risk of injury and potential death. The Chairs and Ranking members asked companies to provide answers to the following questions by August 31, 2023: What systems do you have in place to ensure recalled products that the CPSC has determined pose a serious risk of injury and potential death are not able to be posted to your marketplace? Do you have a compliance staff dedicated to consumer product safety issues? If so, how many full and or part time staff are on that team? What actions do you take to monitor CPSC recalls? What actions will you take to ensure that the Fisher Price Rock ‘n Play, Boppy Newborn Lounger, and similarly designed and/or other recalled products are not available on your platform moving forward? Are there statutory issues that are creating a gray area where it is unclear what the platform’s responsibilities are? Will you commit to working with the Committee to find a solution to this, to ensure that CPSC’s resources are not wasted on sending thousands of takedown requests for products that pose a known hazard and are for sale on your marketplace? CLICK HERE to read the full letter to Meta. CLICK HERE to read the full letter to Amazon. CLICK HERE to read the full letter to Walmart. CLICK HERE to read the full letter to Target. CLICK HERE to read the full letter to Bikelist. CLICK HERE to read the full letter to Ebay. CLICK HERE to read the full letter to Etsy. CLICK HERE to read the full letter to Goldin. CLICK HERE to read the full letter to Kidizen. CLICK HERE to read the full letter to Mercari. CLICK HERE to read the full letter to OfferUp. CLICK HERE to read the full letter to Poshmark. CLICK HERE to read the full letter to Reverb. CLICK HERE to read the full letter to TikTok. CLICK HERE to read the full letter to Pinduoduo. CLICK HERE to read the full letter to Alibaba. CLICK HERE to read the full letter to Shein.

Washington, D.C. — Following announcements this week from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) regarding new vehicle fuel economy standards and penalties on automakers, House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) urged the administration to ease the burden for millions of Americans and stop its regulatory assault that’s handing the keys to America’s automotive industry over to China.   “At a time when prices for new vehicles are at all-time highs, NHTSA’s new fuel economy standards will add even more to the price tag, depriving people of safe, affordable vehicles. These new penalties put an additional burden on manufacturers as well, which will ultimately be passed along to the hardworking people of this county. This is another part of President Biden's full regulatory assault to force Americans to buy unaffordable electric vehicles and cede our automotive future to China.  “Increasing costs, limiting people’s choices, and decimating our energy independence is not a solution to beat China. If the Biden Administration is serious about road safety, affordability, and beating China, it should work to secure our supply chains, reduce regulatory burdens, and unleash American energy.”  NOTE: On Thursday, the Committee held a full markup of several solutions to end the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) assault on the U.S. automotive industry and ensure Americans continue to have the ability to choose the vehicles and fuels that best serve their needs.  NOTE: Earlier this week, the Subcommittee on Innovation, Data, and Commerce held a bipartisan hearing on the future for self-driving vehicles, which NHTSA declined to testify at.  

Washington, D.C. — House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) and Innovation, Data, and Commerce Subcommittee Chair Gus Bilirakis today sent letters to Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Chair Lina Khan, Commissioner Rebecca Kelly Slaughter, and Commissioner Alvaro Bedoya with questions regarding recently released communications between left-wing progressive groups and FTC officials. The communications appear to show these progressive groups seeking to influence FTC policy through coercion and threats. To better determine the extent to which these progressive groups and the White House are influencing FTC policy, Chair Rodgers and Subcommittee Chair Bilirakis specifically asked Chair Khan if she coordinated with these groups to pressure Commissioner Bedoya or other commission officials.  BACKGROUND: On Friday, June 16, 2023, Commissioner Bedoya, submitted to the Secretary of the FTC several ex-parte communications directed to him in May 2023, including text messages and in-person communications between him, his personal staff, and left-wing activists. The harassing communications from activists were in response to Bedoya issuing a statement in which he indicated disagreement with action taken by Chair Khan, action the Wall Street Journal’s Editorial Board characterized as a “power grab.” The communications that ensued between Commissioner Bedoya, his office, and individuals affiliated with progressive groups appear to show a coordinated pressure campaign of FTC officials.  Excerpts from the text messages sent to Commissioner Bedoya by Mr. Dan Geldon, an antitrust reform consultant and former chief of staff to Senator Elizabeth Warren, are included below. Commissioner Bedoya did not respond to these messages.   Mr. Geldon followed up after the initial message stating:  Mr. Geldon then texted a staffer of the Commissioner, who explained in the green text that there is now a prohibition on communicating regarding an active administrative proceeding.  WHY IT MATTERS: In response to these troubling interactions, Chair Rodgers and Subcommittee Chair Bilirakis are asking the FTC to be more transparent about how left-wing radical activists appear to be dictating the commission’s policy decisions. These harassing messages raise serious questions related to how the FTC, an independent agency, could be influenced by the White House through left-wing activist groups that self-identify as advising on personnel decisions in the Biden administration.  The members asked Chair Khan the following questions to determine her involvement in this brazen campaign of intimidation:  Did you direct the individuals, or groups associated with the individuals, mentioned in Commissioner Bedoya’s production, to treat Commissioner Bedoya in this manner?  Were you made aware that Commissioner Bedoya would be threatened and did you tell AELP not to invite Commissioner Bedoya to their summit?   In addition, the members asked the Chair and the Commissioners:  Has behavior by progressive activists, like what was detailed in Commissioner Bedoya’s ex parte notice, contributed to low staff morale and the departures of long-time staff of the Commission?  Has Adam Green of the Progressive Change Campaign approached you about hiring anyone from his organization’s list of “400 recommended names for positions,” in the Biden Administration? If so, did you hire any of these individuals? Did you recommend that any of these individuals be appointed to career positions at the FTC because of all the vacancies created by low morale under your leadership of the Commission?  Can you provide all communications (including but not limited to notes, text messages, emails and attachments, call logs, or memos to file after an in-person interaction) that you or your staff have had with Dan Geldon, Adam Green, and those who work at their organizations?  Can you provide dates and attendees at any meetings attended by you or your staff, FTC career staff, and Dan Geldon, Adam Green, and those who work at their organizations, and a summary of what was discussed?  Can you provide any information, or communications--including but not limited to notes, text messages, emails and attachments, call logs, or memos to file after an in-person interaction—your offices have had related to coordination with the White House and outside groups on matters related to the “summer strategy of amplifying some of the FTC’s bold moves?” What are the “bold moves” referred to in this exchange? Information related to all interactions and communications—including but not limited to notes, text messages, emails and attachments, call logs, or memos to file after an in-person interaction—that career, non-political, staff have had with the individuals and organizations associated with Dan Geldon, Adam Green, and those who work at their organizations?  CLICK HERE to read the full letter. 

Washington, D.C. – Today, House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA), along with House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH), sent a letter to Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Chair Lina Khan raising concerns about her adherence to federal ethics guidance and whether she misled Congress about ethics advice from the FTC's Designated Agency Ethics Official (DAEO).  On April 18, 2023, Chair Khan testified before an Energy and Commerce subcommittee hearing regarding the FTC’s budget. At that hearing, Chair Rodgers asked Chair Khan: “Are there any instances where you’ve not followed the DAEO’s advice?” After pausing for a few seconds, Chair Khan responded, “no,” and then attempted to explain her response by stating, “I have consulted with the DAEO and have taken actions that are consistent with the legal statements the DAEO has made.”  On June 16, 2023, a journalist published a nonpartisan ethics memorandum, dated August 31, 2022, and written by the FTC’s DAEO, analyzing Chair Khan's ability to sit as a judge in a specific proceeding before the FTC. According to the ethics memorandum, the DAEO “recommend[ed] Chair Khan recuse to avoid an appearance of partiality concern pursuant” to federal ethics regulations. The relevant ethics regulations specify that even if there is no per se conflict of interest, “where the employee determines that the circumstances would cause a reasonable person with knowledge of the relevant facts to question his impartiality in the matter, the employee should not participate in the matter...” The DAEO concluded that a reasonable person would question Chair Khan's partiality in the matter at hand, noting her “strong reservations with Chair Khan participating as an adjudicator in this proceeding.”  The recent disclosure of the DAEO’s memorandum suggests that Chair Khan's response to Chair Rodgers during the recent subcommittee hearing omitted an important recommendation by the DAEO. It raises serious questions about Chair Khan’s commitment to the fair and impartial administration of the FTC’s authorities.   CLICK HERE to read the full letter.  

Members press companies to answer what information is collected and where it is sold Washington, D.C. — House Energy and Commerce Committee Republicans, led by Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) and Committee Democrats, led by Ranking Member Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-NJ), today wrote to the heads of data broker companies, requesting information to help the Committee protect Americans’ data from misuse. They were joined by Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Chair Morgan Griffith (R-VA) and Ranking Member Kathy Castor (D-FL), Subcommittee on Innovation, Data and Commerce Chair Gus Bilirakis (R-FL) and Ranking Member Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), Subcommittee on Health Chair Brett Guthrie (R-KY) and Ranking Member Anna G. Eshoo (D-CA), and Subcommittee on Communications and Technology Chair Bob Latta (R-OH) and Ranking Member Doris Matsui (D-CA).  BACKGROUND:   The Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations launched a bipartisan investigation at a hearing on April 19, 2023, titled “Who is Selling Your Data: A Critical Examination of the Role of Data Brokers in the Digital Economy.”  Data brokers purchase, collect, aggregate, license, sell, or otherwise share a wide range of information from Americans, including but not limited to demographic, location, and health data.  These companies profit from trading in Americans’ personal information, including sensitive information, often with little government oversight and in some cases, without any concern for how buyers use the consumer data that they purchase from brokers.  A recent study from Duke University found, for example, that “some data brokers are marketing highly sensitive data on individuals’ mental health conditions on the open market, with seemingly minimal vetting of customers and seemingly few controls on the use of purchased data.”  KEY EXCERPT:   “American privacy concerns in the data broker industry are not new, and existing laws do not sufficiently protect Americans’ data from misuse. In 2014, the FTC issued a report recommending that Congress require data brokers to increase transparency and give Americans more control of their data. However, data brokers can easily circumvent existing rules and laws regarding the collection and sharing of certain types of data, such as HIPAA.   “Enacting a comprehensive federal privacy law is a top priority for the Committee on Energy and Commerce. Currently, Americans do not have control over whether and where their personal data is sold and shared; they have no guaranteed way to access, delete, or correct their data; and, they have no ability to stop the unchecked collection of their sensitive personal information. According to the Electronic Privacy Information Center, the overcollection and secondary uses of personal data, including the sale to and use by data brokers, are inconsistent with the reasonable expectations of online consumers and may lead to discriminatory targeting that violates the privacy and autonomy of consumers.”  The leaders asked the companies for information pertinent to helping the Committee understand how data brokers purchase, collect, use, license, and sell Americans’ data, including:  What data elements do you possess on Americans and market to your clients?   In particular, do you possess any of the following:  Americans’ health data? If yes, what kind of health data?  Americans’ location data? If yes, what data elements?  Americans’ phone data, such as data on any apps downloaded on their mobile devices? If yes, what data elements?  Information revealing Americans’ purchase history? If yes, what data elements?  Information about children under the age of 13?  Information about children between the ages of 13 and 18?  Are there any categories of Americans’ personal information that you will not purchase, collect, aggregate, license, or sell and, if so, what categories are those?  When you license, sell, or otherwise share Americans’ personal information with your clients, do you require your clients to disclose the purpose(s) for which they will use the data?   If so, what do you do, if anything, to confirm they are using the data for the stated purpose(s)?  How much money did you spend in each of the past five years on purchasing or licensing Americans’ personal information?  What percentage of your annual revenue for each of the past five years was derived from selling or licensing Americans’ personal information?  How many clients did you sell or license Americans’ personal information to?  Does your company use the personal information of Americans that you purchase, collect, or aggregate to categorize people based on income, sex, age, race, or other categories?  What steps, if any, does your company take to protect data of users under eighteen?  When you become aware that you or your clients have transferred Americans’ personal information to a foreign adversary or a company beholden to a foreign adversary—currently defined by the Secretary of Commerce to include China, Russia, North Korea, Cuba, the Maduro regime in Venezuela, and Iran—do you notify the individual(s) whose personal information has been transferred or any U.S. government entity? If not, why not?  You can view the letters below:  Acxiom LLC AtData Babel Street   CoreLogic Solutions, LLC   Epsilon Data Management, LLC Equifax   Experian   Gravy Analytics, Inc. Intelius, LLC Kochava Inc. LiveRamp, Inc. Mylife   Oracle America, Inc.   PeopleConnect, Inc. Placer.ai   RELX Safegraph Inc. Spokeo, Inc.   Thomson Reuters   TransUnion   Verisk Analytics   Whitepages, Inc.

Washington, D.C. — House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA), Subcommittee on Innovation, Data, and Commerce Chair Gus Bilirakis (R-FL), and Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Chair Morgan Griffith (R-VA) today requested a full accounting from Secretary of Commerce Gina Raimondo of funding from the CHIPS and Science Act.  The letter follows an Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee hearing at which the Department of Commerce Inspector General Peggy Gustafon provided the following testimony :  "The increased funding may also increase the volume and complexity of financial transactions, thus making it more difficult to detect and prevent payment errors, fraud, waste, and abuse. The increase in funding may require additional monitoring and reporting to ensure project recipients comply with statutes, achieve intended outcomes, and use funds efficiently. Finally, the increased funding may introduce new or emerging risks that must be identified and addressed in a timely fashion." KEY COMMITTEE LETTER EXCERPT:   “Over the past two years, under one-party Democratic rule, Congress and the Biden administration have spent trillions of dollars across the federal government. Beginning with the American Rescue Plan Act and most recently with the so-called Inflation Reduction Act, Democrats have funneled an excessive amount of taxpayer dollars to advance their radical, progressive agenda and to benefit their political allies. The CHIPS and Science Act granted the Department of Commerce (the Department) control of $50 billion to spend on semiconductor activities, including $39 billion in manufacturing incentives. The American people deserve a full, transparent, and regular accounting of the funds that have been spent, where the funds have gone and for what purpose, who has benefited, and how much remains." The Chairs requested monthly reports beginning on no later than April 18, 2023.  CLICK HERE to read the full letter.

Washington, D.C. — House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Cathy Rodgers (R-WA), Subcommittee on Communications and Technology Chair Bob Latta (R-OH), Subcommittee on Health Chair Brett Guthrie (R-KY), Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Chair Morgan Griffith (R-VA), Subcommittee on Innovation, Data, and Commerce Chair Gus Bilirakis (R-FL), Subcommittee on Environment, Manufacturing, and Critical Materials Chair Bill Johnson (R-OH), and Subcommittee on Energy, Climate, and Grid Security Jeff Duncan (R-SC) wrote to the heads of the Department of Energy, Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and Department of Commerce laying out expectations for intergovernmental cooperation regarding oversight. As Chair Rodgers said in the full committee markup of Energy and Commerce’s Authorization and Oversight Plan for the 118th Congress, “We have a responsibility to conduct oversight to get answers on behalf of those we serve and to ensure accountability so the government is responsive to the American people.” The members outline the below seven principles for each agency or department to comply with Congressional requests and provide answers the American people deserve. 1. For all requests or questions, please reproduce the requests or questions presented in a written letter with the department or agency response. 2. In the spirit of comity and inter-branch accommodation, your department or agency should endeavor to cooperate as much as possible with committee oversight requests. If your department or agency has determined it will not voluntarily cooperate with the requests, please provide electronic written notice within two business days specifying which requests you are declining to cooperate with and the stated reasons for voluntary noncooperation. 3. Your department or agency should make a determination on whether certain requests cannot be fulfilled as presented. Provide electronic written notice within one business week of receipt of the request about such determinations, stating the reasons why. If there is an alternative approach that could address the Committee’s request, then such an alternative approach should be suggested in the interests of comity and inter-branch accommodation. 4. If the department or agency needs clarification about a Committee request, your staff should make good faith efforts to contact Committee staff for assistance as soon as possible. 5. We expect your department or agency to provide a written response to our oversight requests within two weeks of receipt of the letter. If the department or agency needs additional time to respond to Committee requests, your staff should make good faith efforts to contact Committee staff for assistance as soon as possible. 6. If your department or agency has determined that certain requested documents cannot be produced pursuant to a privilege or other legal basis, your department or agency should submit an index of the withheld documents and the privilege asserted within two business weeks of receipt of the request letter. 7. If your department has determined that a requested witness cannot be made available pursuant to a privilege or other legal basis, your department or agency should submit in writing an explanation of the privilege or other legal basis asserted within two business weeks of receipt of the request letter. CLICK HERE to view the letter to Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm. CLICK HERE to view the letter to HHS Secretary Xavier Becerra. CLICK HERE to view the letter to EPA Administrator Michael Regan. CLICK HERE to view the letter to Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo.

Washington, D.C. — House Energy and Commerce Committee Republican Leader Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA), Oversight and Investigation Subcommittee Republican Leader Morgan Griffith (R-VA), Communications and Technology Subcommittee Republican Leader Bob Latta (R-OH), and Consumer Protection and Commerce Subcommittee Republican Leader Gus Bilirakis (R-FL) sent a letter to TikTok this week following reports over how the company has failed to address the sexual exploitation of kids on its platform. Excerpts and highlights from the  exclusive coverage  by Forbes: “‘TikTok has been incapable of rooting out the spate of TikTok accounts that are trading illegal child sexual content,’ four House lawmakers wrote Wednesday to TikTok’s chief, citing a November Forbes investigation that revealed how illicit private handles on the platform are hiding child abuse material in plain sight—posted using a setting that makes it visible only to the person logged in. “‘Equally troubling are the livestreams your company hosts that allow adult TikTok users to monetarily persuade children to perform sexually suggestive acts,’ the letter continued, citing a separate Forbes investigation, from April, into how adults use TikTok Live to exploit underage girls—by paying them to engage in provocative, potentially illegal behavior. “‘Considering that about half of all U.S. children use TikTok every day, our concerns enumerated above are paramount. … Therefore, we ask you [to] provide the Committee with a briefing as soon as possible, but no later than December 21,’ the memo concluded. It was led by Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers of Washington, the top Republican on the powerful Energy and Commerce Committee who, along with her counterpart on House Oversight, opened an investigation into TikTok in July over China’s ability to access U.S. user data. Reps. Gus Bilirakis of Florida, Morgan Griffith of Virginia and Bob Latta of Ohio also signed onto the letter fired off Wednesday and shared exclusively with Forbes.” CLICK HERE  to read the full Forbes story. CLICK HERE  to read the full letter to TikTok.

Washington, D.C. —  Bipartisan Energy and Commerce Committee leaders wrote to the CEO of Ticketmaster’s parent company Live Nation Entertainment, Inc. today raising concerns about potentially unfair or deceptive practices in the live ticketing industry and the chaotic ticket pre-sale for Taylor Swift’s upcoming concert tour. The Committee leaders requested a staff briefing from the company on the key areas of concern. The letter was signed by Energy and Commerce Republican Leader Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA), Committee Chairman Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-NJ), Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee Republican Leader Morgan Griffith (R-VA) and Chair Diana DeGette (D-CO), and Consumer Protection and Commerce Subcommittee Republican Leader Gus Bilirakis (R-FL) and Chair Jan Schakowsky (D-IL). “The Energy and Commerce Committee has previously raised concerns about business practices in the live ticketing industry,”  the Committee leaders wrote.  “The recent pre-sale ticketing process for Taylor Swift’s upcoming Eras tour—in which millions of fans endured delays, lockouts, and competition with aggressive scammers, scalpers, and bots—raises concerns over the potential unfair and deceptive practices that face consumers and eventgoers.” In 2019, the Energy and Commerce Committee  launched a bipartisan investigation into allegations of unfair and deceptive practices in the live event ticketing industry. In February 2020, the Committee  held a hearing  with industry leaders including then Ticketmaster North America President Amy Howe, where she testified, “[Ticketmaster] is thoroughly committed to business practices that promote transparency, deter deceptive practices, and provide customers with the ability to enjoy a concert, show, or game.” The Committee leaders noted that the circumstances surrounding ticket sales for Swift’s upcoming tour as well as other recent major tour ticket sales cast serious doubt on those commitments. “To better understand the obstacles consumers have recently faced and to hear an update on actions the company has taken to maximize the experiences of average consumers, we request a Committee staff briefing with your company,”  the bipartisan Committee leaders continued.  “This should include a discussion on additional fees, insider reserves, dynamic pricing, restrictions on transferability, limited ticket availability, speculative ticketing, verified fan program requirements, and scalping by bots and other scammers.” Full text of the letter is available  HERE .