PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Telecommunications, Trade, and Consumer Protection.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 8, 1997
Telephone Slamming Prevention and Internet Connection Act - Amends the Telecommunications Act of 1937 to increase maximum forfeiture penalties for common carriers who willfully or repeatedly fail to comply with prohibitions on changing a subscriber's telephone exchange or toll service selections. Makes such penalties payable to the administrator of the universal service support program for use only in providing such support for schools, libraries, and health care providers. Amends the Communications Act of 1934 to direct the Federal Communications Commission to: (1) require telecommunications carriers to report regularly on each incident of which such carriers have knowledge or have received a complaint of a change in a subscriber's selection of a telephone exchange or toll service without the subscriber's authorization; and (2) make bona fide efforts to enter into agreements with State commissions concerning reciprocal reporting of such incidents.
People & committees
Rep. Franks, Bob [R-NJ-7] · R–NJ
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Telecommunications, Trade, and Consumer Protection.
Referred to the House Committee on Commerce.
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 21, 2025. 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.2112 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.2112 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.2112 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.2112 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.