[Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 126 (Monday, August 3, 2026)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4412-S4414]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                    FOREIGN ROBOCALL ELIMINATION ACT

  Mr. MORAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate 
proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 422, S. 2666.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the bill by title.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       A bill (S. 2666) to direct the Federal Communications 
     Commission to establish a taskforce on unlawful robocalls, 
     and for other purposes.

  There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill, 
which had been reported from the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 
Transportation with an amendment to strike all after the enacting 
clause and insert the part printed in italic, as follows:

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Foreign Robocall Elimination 
     Act''.

     SEC. 2. INTERAGENCY TASKFORCE ON UNLAWFUL ROBOCALLS.

       (a) Definitions.--In this section:
       (1) Commission.--The term ``Commission'' means the Federal 
     Communications Commission.
       (2) Consortium.--The term ``Consortium'' means the 
     consortium described in section 13(d) of the Pallone-Thune 
     TRACED Act (Public Law 116-105).
       (3) Federal agency.--The term ``Federal agency'' has the 
     meaning given the term ``agency'' in section 551 of title 5, 
     United States Code.
       (4) Taskforce.--The term ``taskforce'' means the taskforce 
     on unlawful robocalls established under subsection (b).
       (5) Unlawful robocall.--The term ``unlawful robocall'' 
     means a telephone call made in violation of subsection (b) or 
     (e) of section 227 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 
     U.S.C. 227).
       (b) Establishment.--Not later than 270 days after the date 
     of enactment of this Act, the Commission, after consultation 
     with the Federal Trade Commission and the Attorney General, 
     shall establish a taskforce on unlawful robocalls.
       (c) Membership.--
       (1) In general.--The taskforce shall be composed of the 
     following members:
       (A)(i) A representative of each Federal agency that the 
     Chairman of the Commission, in consultation with the Chairman 
     of the Federal Trade Commission and the Attorney General, 
     considers appropriate.
       (ii) With respect to each Federal agency considered under 
     clause (i) to be appropriate, the Chairman of the Commission 
     shall appoint a representative of that Federal agency to the 
     taskforce based on the recommendations of the head of that 
     Federal agency.
       (B) Seven representatives of private sector entities, to be 
     appointed as described in paragraph (2)--
       (i) 3 of whom shall be representatives from private sector 
     entities with expertise in combating unlawful robocalls, 
     including--

       (I) voice service providers;
       (II) analytics providers;
       (III) technologists; and
       (IV) technology experts;

       (ii) 1 of whom shall be a representative from the 
     Consortium;
       (iii) 1 of whom shall be a representative of a marketing 
     business that communicates with consumers by telephone as 
     part of the normal course of business of that marketing 
     business;
       (iv) 1 of whom shall be a representative of a business or 
     nonprofit organization that communicates with consumers by 
     telephone for non-marketing purposes on a regular basis; and
       (v) 1 of whom shall be a representative of an organization 
     that advocates on behalf of customers and who has relevant 
     experience and expertise in combating unlawful robocalls.
       (2) Appointment of representatives of private sector 
     entities.--
       (A) In general.--Notwithstanding any provision of chapter 
     10 of title 5, United States Code, the members of the 
     taskforce described in paragraph (1)(B) shall be jointly 
     appointed by the Chairman of the Commission, the Chairman of 
     the Federal Trade Commission, and the Attorney General.
       (B) Inability to reach agreement.--
       (i) In general.--Subject to clauses (ii) and (iii), if the 
     Chairman of the Commission, the Chairman of the Federal Trade 
     Commission, and the Attorney General cannot reach agreement 
     regarding an appointment described in subparagraph (A), as 
     determined by the Chairman of the Commission, the Chairman of 
     the Commission shall make that appointment.
       (ii) Notice of appointments.--Not later than 48 hours 
     before appointing a member to the taskforce under clause (i), 
     the Chairman of the Commission shall provide notice of the 
     proposed appointment to the commissioners of the Commission.
       (iii) Request for vote.--If, after receiving notice under 
     clause (ii) of a proposed appointment under clause (i), a 
     commissioner of the

[[Page S4413]]

     Commission requests that the proposed appointment be subject 
     to a vote of the Commission, the Chairman of the Commission 
     may not make that appointment unless a majority of the 
     commissioners of the Commission vote to approve the 
     appointment.
       (d) Report.--
       (1) In general.--The taskforce shall prepare a report on 
     unlawful robocalls, which shall contain recommendations and 
     advice for Federal agencies with jurisdiction relevant to 
     combating unlawful robocalls, and for Congress, regarding the 
     most effective ways to combat unlawful robocalls made into 
     the United States from outside the United States.
       (2) Matters to be studied.--In preparing the report 
     required under paragraph (1), the taskforce shall--
       (A) compare the estimated number of suspected unlawful 
     robocalls made within the United States with the estimated 
     number of unlawful robocalls made into the United States from 
     outside the United States;
       (B) determine which foreign countries serve as the foreign 
     points of departure for the highest volume of unlawful 
     robocalls made into the United States;
       (C) determine the magnitude of financial loss and the 
     number of instances of stolen identity that occur within the 
     United States each year as a result of unlawful robocalls 
     made from outside the United States;
       (D) examine methods for encouraging the adoption of caller 
     identification authentication technology in foreign 
     countries;
       (E) examine and provide information on options for how 
     countries can collaborate on solutions to authenticate and 
     verify international calls, including relevant analytics 
     relating to unlawful robocalls and technical options that can 
     be used with respect to that authentication and verification;
       (F) examine how better implementation of technical 
     solutions, such as traceback and caller identification 
     authentication technology in foreign originating countries, 
     would improve coordination between the United States and 
     foreign countries in combating unlawful robocalls;
       (G) determine whether--
       (i) the technical standards commonly known as ``STIR/
     SHAKEN'' adequately provide call authentication for unlawful 
     robocalls from foreign originating providers or foreign 
     intermediate providers through gateway providers in the 
     United States; and
       (ii) it would be desirable to encourage other countries to 
     adopt the standards described in clause (i);
       (H) examine ways to provide incentives to foreign countries 
     to cooperate with law enforcement efforts in the United 
     States to combat unlawful robocalls;
       (I) examine whether any Federal agency, or any other 
     organization, that combats unlawful robocalls needs 
     additional resources in order to more effectively combat 
     unlawful robocalls made into the United States from outside 
     the United States;
       (J) specifically consider whether the ability of the 
     Attorney General to conduct enforcement activities with 
     respect to unlawful robocalls would be increased through the 
     establishment of an office within the Department of Justice 
     dedicated to those enforcement activities;
       (K) examine how increased criminal penalties based on the 
     volume of unlawful robocalls could help prevent unlawful 
     robocalls made into the United States;
       (L) examine how many enforcement activities the Attorney 
     General has undertaken in the year preceding the date on 
     which the preparation of the report begins, including in 
     response to referrals made by the Commission;
       (M) specifically determine how the Attorney General has 
     pursued forfeiture amounts in enforcement activities with 
     respect to unlawful robocalls;
       (N) seek input, as appropriate, from technologists and 
     private sector innovators to find solutions for combating 
     unlawful robocalls;
       (O) identify a list of best practices regarding the 
     identification and blocking of unlawful robocalls that 
     telephone service providers and providers of technology 
     solutions can voluntarily implement to improve the 
     effectiveness of mitigating unlawful robocalls made into the 
     United States from outside the United States;
       (P) evaluate whether requiring periodic public disclosure, 
     in whole or in part, of the results of trace backs conducted 
     by the Consortium would impact the integrity and 
     effectiveness of the trace back process of the Consortium, 
     including by--
       (i) revealing investigative methods;
       (ii) allowing consumers and businesses to avoid providers 
     with a track record of making unlawful robocalls;
       (iii) exposing proprietary, competitively sensitive, or 
     confidential information of legitimate providers or entities;
       (iv) strengthening accountability and deterrence;
       (v) enabling the initiators of unlawful robocalls to evade 
     detection, adapt tactics, or exploit system vulnerabilities;
       (vi) improving the efforts of voice service providers to 
     block calls that are determined to be unwanted based on 
     reasonable analytics;
       (vii) impeding cooperation with future law enforcement 
     investigations or future consumer protection efforts; or
       (viii) ensuring fairness in the reporting of trace back 
     information; and
       (Q) examine mechanisms for improving compliance with the 
     requirements imposed pursuant to sections 6 and 7 of the 
     Pallone-Thune TRACED Act (47 U.S.C. 227b-1, 227 note).
       (3) Report to congress.--Not later than 360 days after the 
     date on which the taskforce is established under subsection 
     (b), the taskforce shall submit to Congress the report 
     prepared under this subsection.
       (e) Use of Funds.--Notwithstanding section 1346 of title 
     31, United States Code, funds made available by this or any 
     other Act to the Commission, the Federal Trade Commission, or 
     the Department of Justice may be used by the applicable 
     Federal agency for coordination with, participation in, or 
     recommendations involving the taskforce, as required under 
     this section.
       (f) Termination.--The taskforce shall terminate on the date 
     that is 90 days after the date on which the taskforce submits 
     to Congress the report prepared under subsection (d), as 
     required under paragraph (3) of that subsection.

     SEC. 3. FCC NOTICE PROVISION.

       Section 13(d)(2) of the Pallone-Thune TRACED Act (Public 
     Law 116-105) is amended by striking ``annually'' and 
     inserting ``once every 3 years''.

     SEC. 4. REGISTERED CONSORTIUM CONDUCTING PRIVATE-LED EFFORTS 
                   TO TRACE BACK THE ORIGIN OF SUSPECTED UNLAWFUL 
                   ROBOCALLS.

       (a) Immunity for Receiving, Sharing, and Publishing Trace 
     Back Information.--Section 13(d) of the Pallone-Thune TRACED 
     Act (Public Law 116-105; 133 Stat. 3287) is amended by adding 
     at the end the following:
       ``(3) Immunity for receiving, sharing, and publishing trace 
     back information.--
       ``(A) Definition.--In this paragraph, the term `covered 
     information'--
       ``(i) means information regarding suspected--

       ``(I) fraudulent, abusive, or unlawful robocalls;
       ``(II) illegally spoofed calls; and
       ``(III) other illegal calls; and

       ``(ii) includes--

       ``(I) call detail records of calls described in clause (i);
       ``(II) the names of, and other identifying information 
     concerning, the voice service providers that originated, 
     carried, routed, and transmitted calls described in clause 
     (i); and
       ``(III) information about the entities that made calls 
     described in clause (i), including any contact information of 
     individuals that such an entity provided to the voice service 
     provider that originated the call.

       ``(B) Trace back immunity.--No cause of action shall lie or 
     be maintained in any court against the registered consortium 
     for receiving, sharing, or publishing covered information or 
     information derived from covered information.''.
       (b) Publication of List of Voice Service Providers.--
     Section 13(e) of the Pallone-Thune TRACED Act (Public Law 
     116-105; 133 Stat. 3287) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(e) List of Voice Service Providers.--
       ``(1) Publication of list.--The Commission, or the 
     registered consortium in consultation with the Commission, 
     may publish a list of voice service providers based on--
       ``(A) information obtained by the consortium about voice 
     service providers that refuse to participate in private-led 
     efforts to trace back the origin of suspected unlawful 
     robocalls; and
       ``(B) other information the Commission or the consortium 
     may collect about voice service providers that are found to 
     originate or transmit substantial amounts of unlawful 
     robocalls.
       ``(2) Enforcement.--The Commission may take enforcement 
     action based on the information described in paragraph 
     (1).''.

     SEC. 5. ROBOCALL MITIGATION DATABASE.

       (a) Definitions.--In this section:
       (1) Commission.--The term ``Commission'' means the Federal 
     Communications Commission.
       (2) Robocall mitigation database.--The term ``Robocall 
     Mitigation Database'' has the meaning given the term in 
     section 64.6300 of title 47, Code of Federal Regulations, or 
     any successor regulation.
       (3) Unlawful robocall.--The term ``unlawful robocall'' has 
     the meaning given the term in section 2(a).
       (b) Bond Requirement.--
       (1) In general.--The Commission shall issue rules to 
     require that, subject to the other provisions of this 
     section, before a provider may file a certification to the 
     Robocall Mitigation Database, the provider shall post a bond 
     in an amount that is not more than $100,000, if the 
     Commission determines that posting such a bond is necessary 
     to preserve the integrity of the Robocall Mitigation 
     Database.
       (2) Excepted providers.--
       (A) In general.--In issuing rules under paragraph (1), the 
     Commission shall establish criteria to exempt a provider from 
     the requirement to post a bond described in that paragraph if 
     that requirement, as applied to the provider, is not 
     necessary to deter unlawful robocall activity.
       (B) Considerations.--In establishing criteria under 
     subparagraph (A), the Commission shall require consideration 
     of whether a provider--
       (i) is registered with the Commission under section 64.1195 
     of title 47, Code of Federal Regulations (or any successor 
     regulation) and makes contributions under section 254(d) of 
     the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 254(d));
       (ii) holds a certificate of authority, license, or 
     registration with a State public utility commission;
       (iii) is an issuer, the securities of which are listed on a 
     national securities exchange; and
       (iv) otherwise presents indicia of being a bona fide, 
     established communications service provider, such that 
     requiring the provider to post a bond under paragraph (1) 
     would impose unnecessary burdens without materially improving 
     enforcement of section 227 of the Communications Act of 1934 
     (47 U.S.C. 227).
       (c) Implementation.--In implementing this section, the 
     Commission shall--
       (1) require the posting of a bond under subsection (b)(1) 
     from providers that do not demonstrate--
       (A) legitimate, ongoing operations;
       (B) regulatory oversight sufficient to ensure 
     accountability; or
       (C) the ability to pay fines or forfeitures imposed by the 
     Commission or other governmental

[[Page S4414]]

     enforcement authorities with respect to violations of Federal 
     or State laws or regulations;
       (2) establish categorical exemptions for identifiable 
     classes of legitimate providers that satisfy the criteria 
     established under subsection (b)(2); and
       (3) minimize administrative and financial burdens on 
     compliant, established, and regulated providers while 
     ensuring effective enforcement of section 227 of the 
     Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 227).
  Mr. MORAN. I ask unanimous consent that the committee-reported 
substitute amendment be agreed to; that the bill, as amended, be 
considered read a third time and passed; and that the motion to 
reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The committee-reported amendment, in the nature of a substitute, was 
agreed to.
  The bill (S. 2666), as amended, was ordered to be engrossed for a 
third reading, was read the third time, and passed.

                          ____________________