PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 35 · Passed Senate amended · Nov 9, 1997
Telemarketing Fraud Prevention Act of 1997 - Amends the Federal criminal code to require the court, in sentencing a defendant for specified offenses of fraud involving telemarketing, or conspiracies to commit such offenses, to order that the defendant forfeit to the United States any real or personal property: (1) used or intended to be used in the commission of such offense; and (2) constituting, derived from, or traceable to the gross proceeds of the offense. (Sec. 3) Requires (current law permits) persons convicted of fraud in connection with telemarketing to be imprisoned for specified terms in addition to any term imposed for the fraud. (Sec. 4) Makes telemarketing fraud enhanced penalty provisions applicable to conspiracies to commit such offenses. (Sec. 5) Revises mandatory restitution provisions under the code to: (1) direct the court to order restitution to all victims of any offense of fraud for which an enhanced penalty is provided in connection with telemarketing; and (2) define "victim" to have the meaning given that term in code provisions regarding orders of restitution. (Sec. 6) Directs the United States Sentencing Commission to: (1) promulgate Federal sentencing guidelines or amend existing guidelines and policy statements, if appropriate (in accordance with specified requirements), to provide for substantially increased penalties for persons convicted of offenses of fraud for which an enhanced penalty is provided in connection with telemarketing; and (2) submit to the Congress an explanation of each action taken and any additional policy recommendations for combating such offenses. (Sec. 7) Prohibits use of the name "United States Marshals Service" or specified derivations thereof in a manner reasonably calculated to convey endorsement, approval, or authorization by the Service except with the written permission of the Director of the Service. (Sec. 8) Directs a provider of an electronic communication or remote computing service to disclose records or information pertaining to a subscriber to or customer of such service to a governmental entity when such entity submits a formal written request, relevant to a law enforcement investigation concerning telemarketing fraud.
People & committees
Rep. Goodlatte, Bob [R-VA-6] · R–VA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 105-184.
Became Public Law No: 105-184.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion that the House agree to the Senate amendment Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays (2/3 required): 411 - 1 (Roll No. 232). (consideration: CR H4590-4594, H4608)
House roll call 232 · Individual votesResolving differences -- House actions: On motion that the House agree to the Senate amendment Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays (2/3 required): 411 - 1 (Roll No. 232).(consideration: CR H4590-4594, H4608)
House roll call 232 · Individual votesAt the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 5, rule I, the chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate.
Mr. Goodlatte moved that the House suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendment.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.
The committee substitute as amended agreed to by Unanimous Consent.
Amendment SP 1629 agreed to in Senate by Unanimous Consent.
Amendment SP 1629 proposed by Senator Sessions for Senator Harkin.
Amendment SP 1628 agreed to in Senate by Unanimous Consent.
Amendment SP 1628 proposed by Senator Sessions for Senator Leahy.
Measure laid before Senate by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR S12426-12427)
Committee on Judiciary. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably.
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 206.
Committee on Judiciary. Reported to Senate by Senator Hatch with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. Without written report.
Committee on Judiciary. Reported to Senate by Senator Hatch with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. Without written report.
Received in the Senate and read twice and referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H4868-4872)
Mr. McCollum moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 94.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 105-158.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 105-158.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee by Voice Vote.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 10, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.1847 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.1847 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.1847 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.1847 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.