PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Ordered to be Reported by the Yeas and Nays: 37 - 0.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Nov 19, 2025
Foreign Robocall Elimination Act
This bill modifies and expands certain Federal Communications Commission (FCC) programs targeting illegal robocalls and creates a task force to advise the federal government on foreign robocalls.
For example, the bill directs the FCC to issue rules under which certain voice service providers (i.e., phone companies) may be required to post a bond before filing required certifications in the Robocall Mitigation Database. (Under current law, providers must file annual certifications in this database regarding their compliance with illegal robocall mitigation requirements. Noncompliant providers are removed from the database and effectively blocked from the U.S. telephone network.) Providers that do not demonstrate legitimate operations, sufficient regulatory oversight, or the ability to pay fines may be subject to the bond requirement. The FCC must establish categorical exemptions for classes of legitimate providers that satisfy certain criteria.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Further, the bill makes changes related to the FCC’s traceback consortium, a group selected by the FCC to conduct private-led efforts to trace the origin of suspected illegal robocalls. Specifically, the bill protects the consortium from liability for receiving, sharing, or publishing information about suspected fraudulent, abusive, or illegal robocalls and other illegal calls. Additionally, the bill authorizes the consortium to publish a list of voice service providers based on information about providers’ transmission or origination of illegal robocalls or refusal to participate in traceback efforts. (Currently, only the FCC may publish this list.)
The bill also establishes an interagency task force on combating robocalls that originate outside the United States.
People & committees
Rep. McDowell, Addison P. [R-NC-6] · R–NC
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Ordered to be Reported by the Yeas and Nays: 37 - 0.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee by Voice Vote.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
Referred to the Subcommittee on Communications and Technology.
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: Oct 27, 2026. 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.6152 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.6152 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.6152 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.6152 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.