PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Courts, Commercial and Administrative Law.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Dec 20, 2011
FCC Merging Entities Regulatory Guidance and Ethical Reform Act of 2011 or the FCC MERGER Act - Directs the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to create and implement rules requiring public disclosure of contributions (including financial contributions, contributions in-kind, language to be filed, and offers of employment) received by any party that submits to the FCC facts, arguments, offers of settlement, or proposals of adjustment, whenever such contributions may constitute a potential conflict of interest.
Requires that such rules: (1) be applicable to all FCC proceedings, including rulemakings, transfers of licenses, mergers, combinations, and adjudicatory proceedings; and (2) include a requirement of a description of any contributions received from any party or applicant within one year of any such proceeding pending before the FCC, where such contributions may constitute a conflict of interest.
Allows contributions to constitute a potential conflict of interest if made by a party with a direct financial interest in the outcome of a pending FCC proceeding.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Prohibits a former FCC official from accepting employment from a regulated entity as an employee, officer, director, or consultant within a one year after: (1) presiding over the transfer of licenses acquired or formerly held by the entity offering employment to the officer; (2) presiding over a merger, combination, or adjudicatory proceeding in which the entity offering employment was a party to the proceeding; or (3) issuing a decision to approve such a transfer or with respect to such proceedings.
Authorizes the Attorney General (DOJ) to bring a civil action in an appropriate U.S. district court against any person who engages in such prohibited conduct concerning the employment of a former or current FCC official. Sets forth civil penalties for individuals and organizations engaging in such conduct.
People & committees
Rep. Waters, Maxine [D-CA-35] · D–CA
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 Courts, Commercial and Administrative Law.
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 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.3763 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.3763 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.3763 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.3763 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.