PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 25, 2020
Martha Wright Prison Phone Justice Act
This bill establishes requirements related to certain charges, practices, classifications, or regulations in connection with confinement facility communications services.
Specifically, the bill requires the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to establish maximum rates and charges that a provider of confinement facility communications services may charge for such services. The bill provides interim rate caps until the FCC establishes such rates and charges.
The bill requires a provider of confinement facility communications services to assess all charges for communications on a per-minute basis for the actual duration of the communication, and it prohibits a provider from charging a per-communication or per-connection charge. A provider also may not charge an ancillary service charge except in certain circumstances.
Further, the bill prohibits a provider from assessing a site commission, which is a payment or donation made to certain entities that operate or oversee a confinement facility.
People & committees
Rep. Rush, Bobby L. [D-IL-1] · D–IL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
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: Apr 7, 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.6389 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.6389 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.6389 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.6389 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.