PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Committee on Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe. Joint hearings held.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Dec 8, 2011
Global Online Freedom Act of 2011 - Makes it U.S. policy to: (1) promote the freedom to seek, receive, and impart information and ideas through any media; (2) use all appropriate instruments of U.S. influence to support the free flow of information without interference or discrimination; and (3) deter U.S. businesses from cooperating with Internet-restricting countries in effecting online censorship.
Expresses the sense of Congress that: (1) the President should seek international agreements to protect Internet freedom; and (2) some U.S. businesses, in assisting foreign governments to restrict online access to U.S.-supported websites and government reports and to identify individual Internet users, are working contrary to U.S. foreign policy interests.
Amends the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 to require assessments of electronic information freedom in each foreign country.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Directs the Secretary of State to annually designate Internet-restricting countries.
Amends the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 to require each Internet communications services company that operates in an Internet-restricting country to include in its annual report information relating to: (1) human rights due diligence, (2) policies pertaining to the collection of personally identifiable information, and (3) restrictions on Internet search engines or content hosting services.
Amends the Export Administration Act of 1979, as continued in effect under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, to direct the Secretary of Commerce to: (1) establish a list of goods and technology that would assist a foreign government in acquiring the capability to carry out censorship, surveillance, or any other related activity through means of telecommunications, including the Internet; and (2) prohibit the export of listed goods or technology to a government end user in any Internet-restricting country.
People & committees
Rep. Smith, Christopher H. [R-NJ-4] · R–NJ
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Committee on Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe. Joint hearings held.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Capital Markets and Government Sponsored Enterprises.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E2249-2250)
Referred to the Subcommittee on Trade.
Referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and in addition to the Committees on Ways and Means, and Financial Services, 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 Foreign Affairs, and in addition to the Committees on Ways and Means, and Financial Services, 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 Foreign Affairs, and in addition to the Committees on Ways and Means, and Financial Services, 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 14, 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.3605 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.3605 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.3605 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.3605 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.