Key Takeaways
- •Rep. Guthrie (R, KY-2) advanced the Kids Internet Digital Safety Act despite a breakdown in bipartisan negotiations, moving the partisan package toward a House floor vote.
- •Rep. Ruiz (D, CA-25) presented testimony from hundreds of bereaved parents who argued the legislation creates loopholes for tech companies and fails to provide meaningful online protections.
- •Rep. Castor (D, FL-14) challenged the exclusion of a "duty of care" requirement, while Rep. Guthrie (R, KY-2) defended his amendment as protecting existing state product liability litigation.
- •Republicans argued the package empowers families through mandatory default safety settings, while Democrats contended the bill’s "actual knowledge" standard effectively immunizes platforms from responsibility for child harm.
- •The committee also advanced five bipartisan energy bills to strengthen grid security, while the partisan tech package moves to the House floor for a contentious final vote.
Read the full transcript
Starting at $350/mo
- Full hearing transcripts
- Speaker timestamps with video verification
- Organization & competitor mentions
- Same-day delivery
- Personalized summaries
30-day money-back guarantee on all paid plans.
Hearing Analysis
The House Energy and Commerce Committee, chaired by Rep. Brett Guthrie (R, KY-2), held a full committee markup on March 5, 2026, to consider nine pieces of legislation. The hearing focused on two primary policy areas: protecting children and teens from online harms and strengthening the physical and cybersecurity of the United States energy infrastructure. While the five energy-related bills received broad bipartisan support, the four bills related to online safety—consolidated into the Kids Internet Digital Safety (KIDS) Act (H.R. 7757)—became the subject of intense partisan debate.
The KIDS Act (H.R. 7757) serves as an omnibus package for several proposals, including the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA), the SCREEN Act, the SAFEBOTS Act, the AWARE Act, the Safe Gaming Act, and the No Fentanyl on Social Media Act. Rep. Guthrie (R, KY-2) and Rep. Gus Bilirakis (R, FL-12) defended the package as the most comprehensive effort to date to empower parents and protect minors from addictive algorithms, predatory grooming, and exposure to harmful content like pornography and illicit drug sales. Rep. Erin Houchin (R, IN-9) specifically highlighted the SAFEBOTS Act, which would require AI chatbots to disclose their non-human nature and provide crisis resources to minors. Rep. Gabe Evans (R, CO-8), a former police officer, emphasized the importance of the No Fentanyl on Social Media Act in curbing the digital distribution of lethal drugs.
However, Committee Democrats, led by Ranking Member Frank Pallone (D, NJ-6), voiced strenuous opposition to the KIDS Act. The primary points of contention were the removal of a "duty of care" standard and the inclusion of broad federal preemption. Rep. Kathy Castor (D, FL-14) argued that without a duty of care, tech companies are not legally obligated to design products that prevent foreseeable harms, such as infinite scroll or addictive engagement loops. Rep. Raul Ruiz (D, CA-25) and Rep. Lori Trahan (D, MA-3) criticized the bill's preemption provisions, asserting they would nullify stronger state-level protections like the California Age-Appropriate Design Code Act. Furthermore, Democrats attacked the "actual knowledge" standard in the bill, which they argued allows companies like Meta Platforms, Inc. and Roblox Corporation to claim ignorance of underage users on their platforms to avoid enforcement. Rep. Jake Auchincloss (D, MA-4) characterized the bill as a "false flag operation" by Meta, suggesting the legislation was designed to shield tech companies from ongoing litigation.
In contrast to the tech debate, the committee found common ground on five energy security bills. Rep. Robert Latta (R, OH-5) and Rep. Pallone (D, NJ-6) spoke in favor of H.R. 7272, the Pipeline Cybersecurity Preparedness Act, and H.R. 7258, the Energy Emergency Leadership Act, which aim to enhance the Department of Energy’s (DOE) role as the sector risk management agency. Other bills, such as H.R. 7305 (the Energy Threat Analysis Center Act) and H.R. 7266 (the Rural and Municipal Utility Cybersecurity Act), focus on improving information sharing and providing technical assistance to smaller utilities that lack the resources to defend against sophisticated cyberattacks from nation-states like China.
The hearing was marked by the presence of dozens of grieving parents in the audience, many of whom held photos of children lost to social media-related harms. Several Democratic members, including Rep. Lizzie Fletcher (D, TX-7) and Rep. Kim Schrier (D, WA-8), read the names of these children into the record and noted that many of these families opposed the current version of the KIDS Act, fearing it was too weak to hold platforms accountable. Rep. Guthrie (R, KY-2) countered by noting that the package included bipartisan edits and that further measures, such as Sammy’s Law (which would allow parents to use third-party monitoring software), would be considered separately because they lacked the consensus needed for the main package.
The following organizations were identified and discussed during the hearing: - United States House Committee on Energy and Commerce: The presiding body for the markup, responsible for negotiating the legislative text. - Meta Platforms, Inc. (Meta): Heavily criticized by Democrats for its business model; accused by Rep. Auchincloss (D, MA-4) of lobbying for the bill to escape liability for social media addiction. - United States Department of Energy (DOE): Identified as the lead agency for the energy security bills; Rep. Pallone (D, NJ-6) noted past delays in funding under the previous administration. - Federal Trade Commission (FTC): Designated as the primary federal enforcement agency for the KIDS Act’s privacy and safety standards. - People's Republic of China (China): Cited as a primary cyber threat to the U.S. electric grid; also discussed by Rep. Auchincloss (D, MA-4) regarding the TikTok divestment and international tech competition. - Roblox Corporation: Mentioned by Rep. Pallone (D, NJ-6) as an example of a platform that could be shielded from accountability by the bill's preemption standards. - Discord Inc.: Referenced by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D, NY-14) regarding a controversial facial scanning age-verification rollout and a significant data breach. - Supreme Court of the United States: Cited by Rep. Diana Harshbarger (R, TN-1) regarding the Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton ruling, which upheld state-level age verification for adult websites. - National Institutes of Health (NIH): Tasked under the SAFEBOTS Act to study the long-term mental health effects of AI chatbots on minors. - TikTok Inc.: Mentioned in the context of national security and the legislative precedent for forcing divestment from Chinese ownership.
The markup concluded with the committee moving toward votes on the individual bills and amendments. While the energy bills are expected to move forward with broad support, the KIDS Act faces a partisan path as it heads to the House floor, with Democrats calling for a return to the negotiating table to restore the duty of care and narrow the preemption language.
Transcript
All right. The committee will come to order. Before we begin, I'd like to take a moment to address our guests in the audience. Thank you for being here. We appreciate everybody being here. We think engaged citizens are welcomed and you are a very valuable part of our process. So appreciate it. But I do want to remind our guests in the audience that the chair is obligated under the rules of the House and the rules of the committee to maintain order and preserve decorum in the committee room. I know that we all have deep feelings on these issues, that we all may not agree on everything, but I ask that we all abide by these rules and be respectful of our audience members, our viewers, and our witnesses. The chair appreciates the audience's cooperation in maintaining order as we have a full discussion of these issues. So the chair will now recognize I'll recognize myself for a opening statement, five minutes. As as people, as a committee, and as a Congress, there are few things that are more essential than our responsibility to protect our children. Today, the harms kids face online are complex, they are immense, and they're constantly changing. In August of 2025, the ranking member and I sat down and made a commitment to try to deliver a bipartisan package to empower parents and to protect children and teens online. We both recognize the gravity of the issue. We both recognize that parents across this country are asking for action. Since that time, the bipartisan committee staff has spent more than 40 hours directly negotiating these bills and countless more working with members on this committee, stakeholders, and each other to build consensus. Dozens of hours of negotiation, drafts, redlines, counterproposals, serious engagement, and good faith efforts. And I'm disappointed that despite all that work, we're ultimately unable to reach a bipartisan agreement. This committee has a long history of working across the aisle on issues affecting children and families in the past. We have shown that when the stakes are high enough, we can put politics aside and work together. And that is why it is unfortunate the slate of bills today before us is not bipartisan. But at the end of the day, members of Congress, our responsibility is to our constituents, especially our children. Across the country, children are being targeted, groomed, harassed, and exploited online. Algorithms amplify addictive, harmful content. Predators exploit anonymity, and parents are left trying to navigate a digital world that evolves faster than the safeguards they have at their disposal. Every month we delay, more families experience the kind of devastation that no parent should ever endure. We worked hard to try to make these bills bipartisan. We meant it when we once said we wanted to get there, but the absence of a of a bipartisan consensus cannot be an excuse for inaction. We hoped to do this with our Democrat colleagues, but if we cannot do it together, we still must move forward and the time is now. We're taking the meaningful steps forward to empower parents and protect children and teens online. We owe it to parents. We owe it to communities and most importantly, we owe it to the kids who are counting on us to get this right. Today, we will also mark up five bills from the Energy Subcommittee, which will help ensure the physical and cybersecurity of one of America's greatest forms of infrastructure, our electric grid. As more and more of our lives become digital, the physical and cybersecurity threats to our grid grow in frequency and impact, particularly from adverse nation states. These bipartisan cybersecurity bills will help combat those threats by strengthening DOE's leadership when it comes to securing the energy sector, providing targeted funding and technical assistance to rural and municipal utilities, and authorizing public-private partnerships on grid security to enhance information sharing. I appreciate the willingness of the ranking member Pallone and Castor and ranking member Castor to work with us on these important bills and look forward to moving them forward together. Thank you, and I now yield to the ranking member of the full committee, my good friend, Mr. Pallone, the gentleman from New Jersey. Recognized for five minutes for your opening statement.
Read the full transcript
Starting at $350/mo
- Full hearing transcripts
- Speaker timestamps with video verification
- Organization & competitor mentions
- Same-day delivery
- Personalized summaries
30-day money-back guarantee on all paid plans.
Not ready to subscribe?
Get a free daily digest with hearing summaries ranked by relevance.
Already have an account? Log in
