A Republican bill with no cosponsors
Last activity — Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
This bill is known as the Robo Calls Off Phones Act or the Robo COP Act. It directs the Federal Trade Commission to update its "do-not-call" registry regulations within 180 days of the bill's enactment. The purpose of this change is to ban politically-oriented recorded message telephone calls to any phone numbers that are listed on the "do-not-call" registry. Under the bill, these prohibited calls include outbound recorded messages that promote, advertise, campaign, or solicit donations for political candidates or issues, or that simply include the name of a political candidate.
Yes· 3 of 29
- Scored +6
Does this protect people from being watched or searched?
Reduces intrusive political robocalls for those on the registry.
- Scored +5
Would people over 65 be better off under this?
Seniors are often primary targets for robocalls and will benefit from increased privacy.
- Scored +5
Would retired people be better off under this?
Retirees are more likely to be home to receive and be bothered by robocalls.
The opposite
- Scored -2
Does this protect the individual right to speak freely?
Limits the method by which political candidates can reach constituents.
- Scored -2
Does this protect what people are allowed to say in public life?
Restricts the ability of political campaigns to communicate via recorded calls to certain numbers.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
- Section 2(a): This provision requires the Federal Trade Commission to update the "do-not-call" registry rules to ban political robo calls. People on the registry could benefit by receiving fewer unwanted political recorded messages on their phones.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- The provided text does not contain any specific sections or provisions that outline potential negative consequences or burdens for individuals or groups of people.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would retired people be better off under this? — Retirees are more likely to be home to receive and be bothered by robocalls. Would people over 65 be better off under this? — Seniors are often primary targets for robocalls and will benefit from increased privacy. Would Black Americans be better off under this? — Reduces unwanted political call interruptions. Would Asian Americans be better off under this? — Reduces unwanted political call interruptions. Would billionaires be better off under this? — Reduces unwanted political call interruptions. Would farmers be better off under this? — Reduces unwanted political call interruptions. Would high-income households be better off under this? — Reduces unwanted political call interruptions. Would people with substantial wealth be better off under this? — Reduces unwanted political call interruptions. Would Hispanic Americans be better off under this? — Reduces unwanted political call interruptions. Would LGBTQ people be better off under this? — Reduces unwanted political call interruptions. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Reduces unwanted political call interruptions. Would men be better off under this? — Reduces unwanted political call interruptions. Would people in middle age be better off under this? — Reduces unwanted political call interruptions. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — Reduces unwanted political call interruptions. Would Native Americans be better off under this? — Reduces unwanted political call interruptions. Would people with disabilities be better off under this? — Reduces unwanted political call interruptions. Would people in rural areas be better off under this? — Reduces unwanted political call interruptions. Would students be better off under this? — Reduces unwanted political call interruptions. Would the very wealthiest people be better off under this? — Reduces unwanted political call interruptions. Would union members be better off under this? — Reduces unwanted political call interruptions. Would people in cities be better off under this? — Reduces unwanted political call interruptions. Would veterans be better off under this, taking everything together? — Reduces unwanted political call interruptions. Would white Americans be better off under this? — Reduces unwanted political call interruptions. Would women be better off under this? — Reduces unwanted political call interruptions. Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this? — Reduces unwanted political call interruptions.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this protect people from being watched or searched? — Reduces intrusive political robocalls for those on the registry. Does this give the federal government more power? — Directs the FTC to expand federal regulations on telecommunications. Does this protect the individual right to speak freely? — Limits the method by which political candidates can reach constituents.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices? — Increases protection for consumers against unwanted automated political calls.
- Education And Technology
- Does this give people more control over their personal data? — Enhances the effectiveness of the do-not-call registry by expanding prohibitions.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this protect what people are allowed to say in public life? — Restricts the ability of political campaigns to communicate via recorded calls to certain numbers.
- 9/8/2026
- Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
- Introduced in House