PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · May 22, 2003
Reduction in Distribution of Spam Act of 2003 - Prohibits a person from initiating in interstate commerce the transmission of any unsolicited commercial electronic (UCE) mail message unless the message contains: (1) identification as an advertisement or solicitation; (2) notice of an opt-out opportunity, along with a mechanism for doing so; and (3) a valid physical street address of the vendor. Prohibits the transmission of UCE mail: (1) after valid objection; (2) with fraudulent header information; and (3) from illegally harvested email addresses.
Provides a right of enforcement action for: (1) providers of Internet access service; (2) States on behalf of any of their residents; and (3) the Federal Trade Commission (FTC).
Amends the Federal Criminal code to provide criminal penalties for: (1) falsifying the identify of an UCE mail sender; (2) failing to place warning labels on UCE mail containing sexually oriented material; (3) bulk email violations and repeat offenses; and (4) illegal harvesting of email addresses. Provides for enforcement of such penalties through actions by Internet service providers, the Attorney General, and State attorneys general.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires the FTC to issue regulations to implement this Act. Requires the FTC and the Federal Communications Commission to report to Congress: (1) regarding the need to protect the rights of users of email to avoid receiving unwanted commercial email; and (2) a detailed analysis of the effectiveness and enforcement of the provisions of this Act.
People & committees
Rep. Burr, Richard [R-NC-5] · R–NC
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and Consumer Protection.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security.
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
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 18, 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.2214 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.2214 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.2214 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.2214 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.