PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and Consumer Protection.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Sep 20, 2006
Truth in Video Game Rating Act - Requires the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to prescribe rules that prohibit as an unfair and deceptive act or practice: (1) any rating organization from assigning a content rating to any video or computer game unless it has reviewed its playable content; and (2) any producer, seller, or distributor of such games from withholding or hiding any playable content of the game from a rating organization with the intent of obtaining a less-restrictive content rating than the game would likely receive if such rating organization were to review the withheld or hidden content.
Requires the FTC rules also to require any person submitting to a rating organization a video or computer game with hidden content to accompany it with the codes or methods necessary to access such hidden content.
Directs the Comptroller General to study and report to Congress on the efficacy of the Entertainment Software Ratings Board (ESRB) ratings system in assigning appropriate content ratings to video and computer games, and related questions.
People & committees
Rep. Stearns, Cliff [R-FL-6] · R–FL
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 Commerce, Trade and Consumer Protection.
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 15, 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.6113 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.6113 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.6113 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.6113 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.