News

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, Congressman Brett Guthrie (KY-02), Chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, and Congressman Gus Bilirakis (FL-12), Chairman of the Subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade, along with 10 members of the subcommittee, sent a letter to DeepSeek regarding their data practices and close relationship with the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). “DeepSeek admits to sending Americans’ personal information to servers in China, where it is undoubtedly accessed by officials connected to the Chinese Communist Party. We are concerned that this relationship with agents having close connections to our primary adversary jeopardizes our data and our national security,” said Chairmen Guthrie and Bilirakis. “To ensure Americans and their businesses are secure from foreign interference, we are launching this investigation into DeepSeek and the risks it poses to our nation.” KEY LETTER EXCERPT: “By its own admission, the company’s mobile application—available on app stores in the U.S.—is sending Americans’ personal information to servers in the People’s Republic of China. According to media reports, the company is also sharing users’ personal information with other CCP-linked entities, including ByteDance Ltd. Researchers, meanwhile, have identified serious weaknesses in DeepSeek’s purported security controls and model safeguards. To address these risks, a growing number of states, including New York, Texas, and Virginia have banned DeepSeek on government devices, with states attorneys-general calling for a broader ban.” Background: On January 20, 2025, DeepSeek launched its open-source AI chatbot. On February 18, 2025, DeepSeek was accused of sharing user data with ByteDance, the parent company of TikTok. On March 6, 2025, 21 state attorneys-general urged Congressional leadership to prohibit government devices from “downloading and using the Chinese Communist Party’s DeepSeek AI Software.” On April 16, 2025, the Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party published a report on DeepSeek funneling American data to the CCP and manipulating results to align with CCP propaganda. The Committee members requested answers to the following questions: Provide a detailed description of the types and sources of data used to train your AI models, including any U.S. personal or proprietary information. Confirm whether information entered into your AI applications or chatbots by American consumers or businesses is used to train your AI models. If yes, identify where this information is stored and accessed from, and whether it is shared with any state entity of the People’s Republic of China or other Chinese companies. Describe the technical, administrative, and physical controls used to secure personal and proprietary information associated with your AI offerings, as well as your process for evaluating the security of third-party service providers. Provide a detailed description of any U.S. technology products or services used to develop, integrate, or bring to market your AI offerings. This includes the use of open and closed source AI models developed by U.S. companies and the unauthorized “distillation” of American models. Provide a detailed description of how your AI models are developed and trained, including any steps taken to influence system outputs for alignment with Chinese Communist Party ideology or political goals. Provide a detailed description of any direct or indirect subsidies you receive from the People’s Republic of China, or its political subdivisions, related to AI development. Confirm whether your company has received a request from the People’s Republic of China, or its political subdivisions, for data related to your company’s AI offerings. This includes personal and proprietary data used to train or finetune an AI model and data ingested by your AI services. CLICK HERE to read the full letter. CLICK HERE to read the story from Fox News. ###

WASHINGTON, D.C.  – Today, Congressman Brett Guthrie (KY-02), Chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, Congressman Gus Bilirakis (FL-12), Chairman of the Subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade, and Congressman Gary Palmer (AL-06), Chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, sent a letter to 23andMe regarding the handling of Americans' sensitive data following the company's decision to file for bankruptcy. KEY EXCERPT: “According to 23andMe’s privacy statement, in a bankruptcy, customers’ ‘Personal Information may be accessed, sold or transferred as part of that transaction and this Privacy Statement will apply to [customer] Personal Information as transferred to the new entity.’ Additionally, a judge recently ruled 23andMe has the right to sell the sensitive medical and genetic information of its 15 million customers, which is considered to be the company’s most valuable asset. With the lack of a federal comprehensive data privacy and security law, we write to express our great concern about the safety of Americans’ most sensitive personal information.” Background: On March 23, 2025, 23andMe initiated Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceedings, which could have ramifications for the highly sensitive information of millions of Americans. While Americans’ personal health information is protected under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), these protections only apply if the information is collected by a HIPAA covered entity. Generally, direct-to-consumer companies, like 23andMe, are not covered by HIPAA. Customers have reported issues accessing and deleting their data from their 23andMe accounts. The Chairmen have requested answers to the following questions: If 23andMe were to sell the personal information of its customers either as a standalone asset or as part of a broader sale of the company, what post-sale data privacy and security protections would be in place for its customers’ personal information? Please describe how the representations made in 23andMe’s privacy statement will continue to apply—and be enforced—if the personal information of 23andMe’s customers is sold to a third party. Please include in this response information about what, if anything, would hold a third-party buyer to 23andMe’s privacy statement or prevent it from subsequently using, transferring, or otherwise selling, such information in the future. Does 23andMe plan to change its privacy statement at any time prior to selling any customers’ personal information? If so, please explain the change 23andMe plans to implement and when those changes will go into effect. Does 23andMe intend to vet prospective buyers to which it may sell its customers’ personal information? If so, please detail the vetting process and whether it will include the prospective buyer’s history of implementing data security protections and compliance with sectoral, state, or any other data privacy and security laws. If not, please explain why. Please detail the categories of customer information 23andMe has, and of that what 23andMe is considering selling. Has 23andMe notified its customers of the company’s bankruptcy announcement? If so, please attach the customer notification. If not, please explain why. Has 23andMe provided its customers with a guide for how to delete, or request to delete any information currently in 23andMe’s possession? If so, please provide a copy of that guide and specify when it was provided to customers. If not, please explain why, and explain whether 23andMe will contact each of its customers and provide an opportunity to delete their personal information prior to a potential sale of the company or personal information maintained by the company. Please detail the number of requests 23andMe received from its customers to delete their personal information between when 23andMe filed for bankruptcy and the date of the response to this letter. Of those requests, please provide a breakdown of how many requests were made by customers through their 23andMe online accounts and how many were made via customer service calls because customers were unable to successfully delete their information through their online accounts. Of those requests, please detail the number of fulfilled requests. Will 23andMe offer for sale any information in which a customer has requested the deletion of such information? If so, does 23andMe’s privacy policy consider selling information a legitimate purpose for retaining information past a customer's request to delete their information? Will 23andMe deidentify its customers’ personal information prior to selling it or the company? If so, please detail which information will be deidentified. If not, please explain why the company is electing not to deidentify information. CLICK HERE to read the full letter. CLICK HERE to read the story from CNBC. ###

Letter comes on the eve of athletes competing in the Paris Olympics and after WADA’s President refused to attend an Energy and Commerce Committee oversight hearing Washington, D.C. — In a new letter to World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) President Witold Banka, bipartisan House Energy and Commerce Committee leaders pressed for answers regarding WADA’s handling of positive doping cases within China’s national swimming team ahead of the Tokyo Olympics. The letter contains questions that bipartisan Committee Members would have asked during a recent Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations hearing , which Mr. Banka was invited to attend but refused to appear. Witnesses that did testify at the hearing included: Michael Phelps, American swimmer and Olympic gold medalist   Allison Schmitt, American swimmer and Olympic gold medalist   Travis Tygart , Chief Executive Officer, United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) KEY EXCERPTS:   “We write today to express our sincere disappointment at your refusal to accept our invitation to attend and provide testimony at our recent Subcommittee hearing. Members of Congress have important questions for the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) and are especially concerned about recent reports of your handling of dozens of cases of doping within the Chinese swimming team.  “WADA purports to maintain the integrity of sports by creating a fair and competitive sporting environment free from doping. As a U.S. taxpayer supported entity, WADA has a responsibility to the American people to ensure this integrity by enforcing international testing requirements. We believe WADA has fallen short of this important mission. ”  [...]   “ We are particularly concerned with the excessive deference being extended toward CHINADA—a state-funded operation with leadership deeply intertwined with the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), as current [Chinese Anti-Doping Agency] CHINADA director Li Zhiquan also serves as a Committee Secretary for the CCP. At a meeting in 2023, Zhiquan called on CHINADA employees to be 'loyal to the party' and to 'hold high the great banner of Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era.' Furthermore, WADA’s reported sponsorship arrangement with ANTA Sports—the Chinese athletic company sponsoring the Chinese Olympic Committee and China’s national swimming federation—could be perceived as a conflict of interest. Since WADA is expected to uphold and maintain international anti-doping standards, WADA’s apparent lack of skepticism and failure to enforce the rules against CHINADA is troubling. While we are aware that WADA has opened an investigation, we are concerned that international scrutiny was necessary to force due diligence that should be routine .”  [...]  “This incident unfortunately reinforces our concern that WADA appears to be reverting to its previous poor management practices.”  [...]  “With the Paris Summer Olympic Games Opening Ceremony just a day away , the Committee seeks to better understand the circumstances surrounding WADA’s decision not to appeal the decision to clear the twenty-three swimmers who tested positive for trimetazidine.”   BACKGROUND :  In January 2021, 23 Chinese swimmers (“23 swimmers”) tested positive for trimetazidine, or TMZ, a banned substance improperly used to increase stamina and hasten recovery times.  Three months after the positive tests, CHINADA initiated an investigation into the source of the TMZ and by June 2021 claimed the athletes ingested the banned substance through food tainted in a hotel kitchen.  According to reporting, Chinese investigators “offered no explanation […] for how a prescription drug available only in pill form had contaminated an entire kitchen.”  In reliance on “external legal advice” and its science department, WADA determined that CHINADA’s claims were “plausible” and chose not to appeal the decision or further investigate the matter.  Three of these Chinese swimmers went on to win gold medals at the Tokyo Olympic Games in July of 2021.  China has selected 11 swimmers that tested positive for TMZ before the Tokyo Games to compete in the upcoming Paris Games.  In a strikingly similar case, Kamila Valieva, a Russian figure skater, also tested positive for the banned substance TMZ during the 2022 Beijing Olympics.  The Russian Anti-Doping Agency (RUSADA) issued a provisional suspension but was quickly cleared by RUSADA’s discipline board, since Valieva claimed she ingested the substance by mistake through a contaminated source.  Rather than simply accept RUSADA’s contamination explanation, WADA appealed the decision and ultimately, Valieva received a four-year ban from competition and was retroactively stripped of her gold medal. The letter was signed by Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) and Committee Ranking Member Frank Pallone, Jr., (D-NJ), Subcommittee on Innovation, Data, and Commerce Chair Gus Bilirakis (R-FL) and Ranking Member Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), and Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Chair Morgan Griffith (R-VA) and Ranking Member Kathy Castor (D-FL). CLICK HERE to read the full letter.

Washington, D.C. — House Energy and Commerce Committee (E&C) Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA), E&C Subcommittee on Communications and Technology Chair Bob Latta (R-OH), E&C Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Chair Morgan Griffith (R-VA), E&C Subcommittee on Innovation, Data, and Commerce Chair Gus Bilirakis (R-FL), and House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party, launched an investigation into grants made to an AI scientist at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) with ties to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).  The Chairs made requests for documents to UCLA, the National Science Foundation (NSF), and the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD).  BACKGROUND :  On November 1, 2023, a Newsweek investigation found that the federal government awarded at least $30 million in federal research grants led by Mr. Song-Chun Zhu, who is now “at the forefront of China's race to develop the most advanced artificial intelligence.”  The investigation further revealed the NSF and DOD continued funding Mr. Zhu even as he “set up a parallel institute near Wuhan, took a position at a Beijing university whose primary goal is to support Chinese military research, and joined a CCP ‘talent plan’ whose members are tasked with transferring knowledge and technology to China.”  In particular, Newsweek found that the project once led by Mr. Zhu received $1.2 million in two grants from the Office of Naval Research in 2021, the year following his departure to China.  KEY LETTER EXCERPT:   “Mr. Zhu has openly discussed how if China takes the lead in developing a ‘truly universal intelligence,’ then it will ‘become the winner of the international technology competition.’ He has also referred to the AI race as being equivalent in military importance to the race for the atomic bomb. In a period of intensifying geopolitical competition with the CCP, ceasing federal government support for Chinese AI development is a critical national security imperative.”  CLICK HERE to read the letter to UCLA Chancellor Gener Block.  CLICK HERE to read the letter to NSF Director Sethuraman Panchanathan.  CLICK HERE to read the letter to Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin. 

Washington D.C. — House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) and Innovation, Data, and Commerce Subcommittee Chair Gus Bilirakis (R-FL), on behalf of subcommittee Republicans, sent a letter to China-based e-commerce companies raising concerns over data privacy and security risks for American users, the counterfeit products flourishing on these platforms, and reports of horrific human rights abuses.   BACKGROUND:   China-based e-commerce marketplaces, like TikTok, TaoBao, Pinduoduo, Temu, Alibaba, AliExpress, and Shein, have recently increased in popularity in the U.S.  The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) requires that all Chinese tech companies allow the CCP to access all user information, raising serious data privacy and security concerns for Americans using these platforms .  These marketplaces commonly offer “knock off” versions of products, which often undermine intellectual property laws.  Furthermore, reports have alleged that some of the sellers on these platforms may have committed egregious human rights violations, including the use of forced labor and the selling of products, like wigs, that use hair from Uyghur women forced to shave their heads.  KEY LETTER EXCERPTS:   “The rise in popularity of apps and marketplaces like, TikTok, TaoBao, Pinduoduo, Temu, Alibaba, AliExpress, and Shein, has resulted in sharp public scrutiny regarding the business practices of these companies.”  […]  “Lax policies and practices are leaving American’s data at risk of theft, leading consumers to unknowingly purchase counterfeit goods. In addition to these lax policies and practices, it is important to ensure that supply chains are free of forced labor.”  The Chairs asked companies to respond to the following questions by January 12, 2024:   Please outline the steps taken to delete personal data when requested or ordered by a user, the parent of a user who is a minor, or others authorized to make such a request.  What protections do you have in place to prevent children from spending large amounts of money on your platform?  What data practices do you require of your third-parties?  What data practices do you require of your service providers?  Please individually confirm you are not collecting or compiling the following information:  Religious beliefs;  Political opinions;  Genetic data;  Biometric data;  Data concerning health;  Data concerning racial or ethnic origin;  Data about minors.  Similar to ByteDance, does your company have an internal CCP Committee?  Please document all meetings, communication, or interactions you—or any other senior company executives—have had with members of the Chinese government or the CCP while serving as officers.   Can you provide a complete software bill of materials for all components and components of the components in the mobile app? Please include the developer information and country of origin for all listed components.  Where does your company store the signing key for iOS and Android applications? How is access to the signing keys managed, and who are the developers with access to the signing keys for the mobile application?  Please detail the data security and protections you have to prevent unauthorized access to such signing key.  How frequently is your mobile app or backend security tested? Are they tested by US personnel? To what security standard are they tested?  How frequently is user location data transmitted? Within how many feet is this location data measured?  What compliance procedures do you have in place to ensure compliance with the INFORM Consumers Act ?  We have heard employees of companies associated with the Chinese government, such as TikTok, disagree with notion that Uyghur people are facing a genocide in the Xinjian region of China. Do you agree that there is a genocide occurring in the Xinjiang region of China?  Are you aware of the PRC’s persecution of the Uyghur people, including the reports that Uyghur women’s heads have been shaved to be used for products that are shipped into the U.S.?  Are there products using natural hair that originate in the Xinjiang region available on your e-commerce marketplace?  Are there any other products that have originated from, or contain components or material that originated from the Xinjiang region?  Given the human rights abuses occurring in the Xinjiang region, do you require any additional steps or increased scrutiny for products coming from such region?   If yes, please explain.   Can you unequivocally state that your supply chain is free of forced labor?  What steps are you taking to ensure that your supply chain does not include forced labor?   CLICK HERE to read the full letter to TikTok.  CLICK HERE to read the full letter to Whaleco Inc.  CLICK HERE to read the full letter to Alibaba.  CLICK HERE to read the full letter to Shein. 

Letter comes after Eventbrite censored conservative event while permitting pro-Hamas events Washington, D.C. — House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA), Subcommittee on Communications and Technology Chair Bob Latta (R-OH), Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Chair Morgan Griffith (R-VA), and Subcommittee on Innovation, Data, & Commerce Chair Gus Bilirakis (R-FL), along with Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee Ranking Member Ted Cruz (R-TX) today wrote Eventbrite President and CEO Julia Hartz. The letter raises concerns over Eventbrite’s enforcement practices. BACKGROUND :  On October 23, 2023, Eventbrite removed an event listing titled, “Protecting Women’s Sports with Riley Gaines,” from its platform.    This event was intended to be a public forum for participants, including female athletes, to express issues, experiences, and consequences of biological males competing in their competitions.  Eventbrite listed “Rahm 4 Palestine (GAZA): Talk & Dinner,” scheduled for October 27, featuring a headline speaker who, after the October 7 Israeli massacre, using his verified X account, publicly posted antisemitic messaging that was viewed more than 1 million times.  A sold-out conference scheduled for November 10 in Washington, D.C., “Palestine Center 2023 Annual Conference,” was promoted on Eventbrite.    In advertising this event, organizers referred to the country of Israel as “Israeli apartheid” under Eventbrite’s “About this event” tab.  KEY LETTER EXCERPTS :  “In the last few weeks, Eventbrite, it seems, has selectively enforced its terms of service by removing some events while allowing potentially violative events to remain on the site. We raise the issues below not to dictate or remove events and users from your marketplace, but to better understand your Community Guidelines enforcement process .”  […]  “We struggle to comprehend the rationale for removing this event, while other Eventbrite listings that seemingly violate several of Eventbrite’s Community Guidelines remain live, including some that feature speakers espousing allegiance to entities designated by the U.S. Government as foreign terrorist organizations.”  […]  “Because Gaines’s promotion of the widely held view to preserve women’s athletics starkly contrasts with events on Eventbrite featuring speakers sympathetic to mass murder, this leads us to wonder if pro-terrorist and antisemitic events and event speakers do not plainly violate Eventbrite’s prohibition of content that would ‘discriminate against, harass, disparage, threaten, incite violence against, or otherwise target individuals or groups based on their actual or perceived race, ethnicity, religion, national origin.’ We seek information on what metrics Eventbrite uses to enforce its Community Guidelines on selected issues such as women’s athletics versus terrorism and antisemitism .”    CLICK HERE to read the full letter. 

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. — 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. 

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.