The House Energy and Commerce Committee has advanced two high-profile child safety bills that could reshape much of the internet: the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA) and the Children and Teens' Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA 2.0). The bills passed by voice vote despite dissatisfaction over last-minute changes to KOSA aimed at quelling ongoing criticism.
KOSA and COPPA 2.0 would give government agencies more regulatory power over tech companies with users under 18. KOSA imposes a “duty of care” on major social media companies, making them potentially liable for harm to underage users. KOSA raises the age for enforcement of the 1998 COPPA law and adds new rules on issues like targeted advertising. Versions of both bills passed the Senate in July. Now that they've passed a House committee, they can move on to a vote on the floor. After that, they may need to be voted on with their Senate counterparts before heading to President Joe Biden's desk — where Biden has indicated he will sign them.
At the beginning of the year, it was not yet clear whether KOSA would be voted on in the House of Representatives. Although it was passed overwhelmingly in the Senate, Punchbowl News The report suggested that Republicans in the House had concerns about the bill. However, the House version of KOSA differs greatly from the Senate's, and numerous lawmakers expressed a desire for changes before a full House vote. Both KOSA and COPPA 2.0 had last-minute changes that were voted on in committee, prompting some lawmakers to protest or withdraw their support.
The House KOSA amendment amended a list of harms that large social media companies are supposed to prevent, removing a duty of care to curb “anxiety, depression, eating disorders, substance abuse, and suicidal behavior” and adding one to prevent “promoting intrinsically dangerous acts likely to result in serious bodily harm, serious emotional disturbance, or death.”
The amendment drew considerable criticism. Republican Rep. Dan Crenshaw (Texas), who said he would “reluctantly” vote for the bill, complained that the amendment could lead regulators to censor potentially “disturbing” content. “Doesn't all political expression cause some kind of emotional distress for those who disagree with it?” he argued. (Crenshaw supports a blanket ban on social media access for younger teens.) Conversely, some lawmakers were concerned that excluding conditions like depression would render the bill useless in addressing the alleged psychological harm social media causes in children.
KOSA cosponsor and Rep. Kathy Castor (D-FL), who sponsored the amendment, said it represents a “watered-down” version of the bill, with the goal of getting it to a vote in the House. But neither version is likely to satisfy critics who argue the bill could allow regulators to pressure companies to block children from accessing content that a particular administration doesn't like. The Electronic Frontier Foundation and others have raised concerns that a Republican president could suppress abortion- and LGBTQ+-related content, while some Republican lawmakers are concerned that a Democratic president could suppress content that a particular administration doesn't like. Anti-Abortion messages and other conservative statements.
The vote on COPPA 2.0 was less controversial. But Representative Frank Pallone (D-N.J.) challenged a House provision that would allow parents to obtain information about their teens' social media usage from website operators, even against the child's will. Pallone warned that the provision could allow abusive parents to monitor their child's Internet access. “With a bill that is supposed to provide more privacy for teens, I believe Congress is creating a back door through which their parents can spy on their teens' every click on the Internet,” he said. “Teens have a right to privacy too.”