[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.

                          ____________________