[Congressional Record Volume 170, Number 148 (Monday, September 23, 2024)]
[House]
[Pages H5589-H5591]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
{time} 1615
ONLINE DATING SAFETY ACT OF 2023
Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the
bill (H.R. 6125) to require online dating service providers to provide
fraud ban notifications to online dating servicemembers, and for other
purposes, as amended.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 6125
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Online Dating Safety Act of
2023''.
SEC. 2. ONLINE DATING SAFETY.
(a) Fraud Ban Notification.--
(1) In general.--An online dating service provider shall
provide to a member of the online dating service a fraud ban
notification if the member has received a message through the
online dating service from a banned member of the online
dating service.
[[Page H5590]]
(2) Required contents.--A fraud ban notification under
paragraph (1) shall include the following:
(A) The username or other profile identifier of the banned
member, as well as the most recent time when the member to
whom the notification is being provided sent or received a
message through the online dating service to or from the
banned member.
(B) A statement, as applicable, that the banned member may
have been using a false identity or attempting to defraud
members.
(C) A statement that a member should not send money or
personal financial information to another member.
(D) An online link to information regarding ways to avoid
online fraud or being defrauded by a member of an online
dating service.
(E) Contact information to reach the customer service
department of the online dating service provider.
(3) Manner and timing.--
(A) Manner.--A fraud ban notification under paragraph (1)
shall be--
(i) clear and conspicuous; and
(ii) provided by email, text message, or other appropriate
means of communication consented to by the member.
(B) Timing.--
(i) In general.--Except as provided in clauses (ii) and
(iii), an online dating service provider shall provide a
fraud ban notification under paragraph (1) not later than 24
hours after the fraud ban is initiated against the banned
member.
(ii) Delay based on judgment of provider.--If, in the
judgment of the online dating service provider, the
circumstances require a fraud ban notification under
paragraph (1) to be provided after the 24-hour period
described in clause (i), the online dating service provider
shall, except as provided in clause (iii), provide the
notification not later than 3 days after the day on which the
fraud ban is initiated against the banned member.
(iii) Delay upon request of law enforcement official.--If,
due to an ongoing investigation, a law enforcement official
requests an online dating service provider to delay providing
a fraud ban notification under paragraph (1) beyond the time
when the notification is required to be provided under clause
(i) or (ii), the online dating service provider--
(I) may not provide the notification before the end of the
period of delay (including any extension of such period)
requested by the law enforcement official; and
(II) shall provide the notification not later than 3 days
after the last day of the period of delay (including any
extension of such period) requested by the law enforcement
official.
(b) Enforcement by Federal Trade Commission.--
(1) Unfair or deceptive acts or practices.--A violation of
this section shall be treated as a violation of a regulation
under section 18(a)(1)(B) of the Federal Trade Commission Act
(15 U.S.C. 57a(a)(1)(B)) regarding unfair or deceptive acts
or practices.
(2) Powers of commission.--The Commission shall enforce
this section in the same manner, by the same means, and with
the same jurisdiction, powers, and duties as though all
applicable terms and provisions of the Federal Trade
Commission Act (15 U.S.C. 41 et seq.) were incorporated into
and made a part of this section, and any person who violates
this section shall be subject to the penalties and entitled
to the privileges and immunities provided in the Federal
Trade Commission Act.
(3) Rule of construction.--Nothing in this section may be
construed to limit the authority of the Commission under any
other provision of law.
(c) Actions by States.--
(1) In general.--In any case in which the attorney general
of a State, or an official or agency of a State, has reason
to believe that an interest of the residents of such State
has been or is threatened or adversely affected by an act or
practice in violation of this section, the State, as parens
patriae, may bring a civil action on behalf of the residents
of the State in an appropriate district court of the United
States to obtain appropriate relief.
(2) Notice.--Before filing an action under this subsection,
the attorney general, official, or agency of the State
involved shall provide to the Commission a written notice of
such action and a copy of the complaint for such action. If
the attorney general, official, or agency determines that it
is not feasible to provide the notice described in this
paragraph before the filing of the action, the attorney
general, official, or agency shall provide written notice of
the action and a copy of the complaint to the Commission
immediately upon the filing of the action.
(3) Authority of federal trade commission.--
(A) In general.--On receiving notice under paragraph (2) of
an action under this subsection, the Commission shall have
the right--
(i) to intervene in the action;
(ii) upon so intervening, to be heard on all matters
arising therein; and
(iii) to file petitions for appeal.
(B) Limitation on state action while federal action is
pending.--If the Commission or the Attorney General of the
United States has instituted a civil action for violation of
this section (referred to in this subparagraph as the
``Federal action''), no State attorney general, official, or
agency may bring an action under this subsection during the
pendency of the Federal action against any defendant named in
the complaint in the Federal action for any violation of this
section alleged in such complaint.
(4) Rule of construction.--For purposes of bringing a civil
action under this subsection, nothing in this section may be
construed to prevent an attorney general, official, or agency
of a State from exercising the powers conferred on the
attorney general, official, or agency by the laws of such
State to conduct investigations, administer oaths and
affirmations, or compel the attendance of witnesses or the
production of documentary and other evidence.
(d) One National Standard.--
(1) In general.--A State, or political subdivision of a
State, may not maintain, enforce, prescribe, or continue in
effect any law, rule, regulation, requirement, standard, or
other provision having the force and effect of law of the
State, or political subdivision of the State, that requires
an online dating service provider to notify, prohibits an
online dating service provider from notifying, or otherwise
affects the manner in which an online dating service provider
is required or permitted to notify, a member of the online
dating service that the member has received a message from or
sent a message to a banned member through the online dating
service.
(2) Rule of construction.--This subsection may not be
construed to preempt any law of a State or political
subdivision of a State relating to contracts or torts.
(e) Definitions.--In this section:
(1) Banned member.--The term ``banned member'' means a
member of an online dating service whose account or profile
on the online dating service is the subject of a fraud ban.
(2) Commission.--The term ``Commission'' means the Federal
Trade Commission.
(3) Fraud ban.--The term ``fraud ban'' means the
termination or suspension of the account or profile of a
member of an online dating service because, in the judgment
of the online dating service provider, there is a significant
risk the member will attempt to obtain money from another
member through fraudulent means.
(4) Member.--The term ``member'' means an individual who--
(A) submits to an online dating service provider the
information required by the provider to establish an account
or profile on the online dating service; and
(B) is allowed by the provider to establish such an account
or profile.
(5) Online dating service.--The term ``online dating
service'' means a service that--
(A) is provided through a website or a mobile application;
and
(B) offers members access to dating or romantic
relationships with other members by arranging or facilitating
the social introduction of members.
(6) Online dating service provider.--The term ``online
dating service provider'' means a person engaged in the
business of offering an online dating service.
(7) State.--The term ``State'' means each State of the
United States, the District of Columbia, each commonwealth,
territory, or possession of the United States, and each
federally recognized Indian Tribe.
(f) Effective Date.--This section shall take effect on the
date that is 1 year after the date of the enactment of this
Act.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Florida (Mr. Bilirakis) and the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone)
each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida.
General Leave
Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks
and insert extraneous material in the Record on the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Florida?
There was no objection.
Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 6125, the Online Dating
Safety Act of 2023, sponsored by my good friend and colleague, David
Valadao.
Over the last three decades, online dating platforms have transformed
the way people find their partners. According to the Pew Research
Center, 30 percent of U.S. adults say they have used a dating app or
site, many of whom say it has made the dating process much easier.
However, these technologies have also led to the rise of dating scams
and fraud, unfortunately, and the FTC reported that romance scams
resulted in victims losing $1.3 billion in 2022.
There are countless examples of victims losing their investments and
retirements. One victim was tragically driven to suicide after losing
his life savings. That is terrible.
H.R. 6125 seeks to protect users of online dating platforms against
harmful and fraudulent accounts by requiring platforms to send a fraud
ban notification to a user who has been communicating with a suspended
account or profile.
This crucial step of communication and transparency has been missing
from online dating platforms. This is an opportunity to create a safety
mechanism to better protect Americans from falling victim to such
devastating scams.
The bill advanced out of committee with unanimous support, a
bipartisan
[[Page H5591]]
vote of 44-0. I look forward to the bill passing the House this week.
Really, we have got to take care of this. Too many people are being
taken advantage of, particularly our seniors. We can't have this
happen.
I strongly support H.R. 6125 and ask my colleagues to vote ``yes.'' I
reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak in support of H.R. 6125, the Online
Dating Safety Act. I thank the sponsors of this bill, Representatives
Valadao and Pettersen, for their leadership on the issue of online
dating safety. I also thank Chair Rodgers for her willingness to work
with me at committee to improve the bill.
As more and more consumers report using online dating services, it is
important that they are made aware of potential harms. This bill
ensures that when an online dating app bans someone for fraud, it
notifies all the other users who have been in contact with that banned
person on the app. This will help to reduce the number of people who
fall victim to identified fraudsters looking to extort money from
dating app users.
While there is more to be done to address harms that have arisen in
the online dating space, this bill is an important step forward. I urge
my colleagues to support the bill, and I reserve the balance of my
time.
Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from
California (Mr. Valadao).
Mr. VALADAO. Mr. Speaker, first, I thank my colleague, my coauthor,
Brittany Pettersen, for her support on this. I also thank the members
and staff of the committee. They have been very, very helpful in us
moving this bill forward.
Mr. Speaker, today I rise in support of my bill, the Online Dating
Safety Act. Each year, millions of people are deceived, defrauded, and
misled by users of online dating apps.
While it is sadly common to see people lie about things like their
age or occupation, this bill takes aim at the more sinister fraudsters
who make their livelihoods preying on vulnerable individuals.
According to the Federal Trade Commission, romance scams resulted in
victims losing $1.3 billion in 2022 alone, with senior citizens being
the most at-risk age group.
There are countless horror stories of people being conned out of
their entire life savings, all because they trusted someone they met
online. Individuals who meet online often take their conversations to
other communication platforms, so even when the fraudulent account is
removed, someone might not even know they are talking to someone who
has been removed from that original platform.
This bill requires that the dating platform issue a fraud ban
notification to users who have ever interacted with the person who has
been removed from the app for fraudulent activity. While we can't stop
all criminals, this is a simple and important step to fill a
communication gap and help people make more informed decisions about
who they are really communicating with.
These apps have been around for years, but still there are few
safeguards in place to protect users. I urge my colleagues to support
this bill and prevent the widespread fraud.
Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I have no additional speakers, and I yield
myself the balance of my time to close.
Let me just say that this is an important step forward in dealing
with online dating safety, and I support the bill and urge my
colleagues to support it. I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, again, I appreciate Mr. Valadao putting
forth this bill. We have got to do it. We have got to protect our
seniors and others who use these apps. I encourage a ``yes'' vote on
this particular bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Bilirakis) that the House suspend the rules
and pass the bill, H.R. 6125, as amended.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the
rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________