A Democratic 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, known as the No Personal Data in Grocery Pricing Act, bans large grocery stores and their online platforms from using individualized pricing, dynamic pricing, and facial recognition technology to set or adjust prices. Large stores are defined as retail food stores with at least 15,000 square feet of retail sales floor space. The legislation allows for certain standard practices like coupons, loyalty programs, and publicly disclosed discounts for specific groups like seniors or students. The Federal Trade Commission and state attorneys general are given the authority to enforce these rules and penalize violators. The bill takes effect one year after its enactment.
Yes· 3 of 24
- Scored +6
Does this protect people from being watched or searched?
Prohibiting large retailers from using personal purchase history, location, and biometric data to set variable prices directly protects consumer privacy.
- Scored +6
Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices?
The bill prohibits large grocery stores from using individualized pricing, dynamic pricing, and facial recognition technology to set prices, enhancing consumer protection.
- Scored +6
Does this give people more control over their personal data?
The legislation bans the use of biometric data, facial recognition, and personal data to determine or adjust grocery prices, strengthening individual privacy rights.
The opposite
No question was scored the opposite.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Protection from Personal Data Pricing: Under section 2(a)(1)(A), stores cannot charge individuals different prices based on their personal data, which helps ensure fair and equal pricing for everyday shoppers.
-
Ban on Biometric Surveillance for Prices: Section 2(a)(1)(B) prohibits the use of facial recognition technology or biometric data to set or adjust item prices, protecting consumer privacy while shopping.
-
Protection from Time-Based and Demographic Price Hikes: Section 2(a)(1)(C) and section 2(e)(9) stop stores from raising prices on items based on when people shop, such as after work shifts, or based on demographic and economic characteristics like income or race.
-
Preservation of Helpful Discounts: Section 2(a)(2) protects common consumer savings like coupons, voluntary loyalty programs, and public discounts for groups like veterans, seniors, students, and participants in nutrition assistance programs.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Restrictions on Certain Store Flexibility: Because the text of the bill strictly prohibits specific pricing methods without outlining burdens on consumers in the text itself, no specific negative impacts or burdens on individuals can be identified directly from the provided text.
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 households on low incomes be better off under this? — Low-income households are particularly vulnerable to algorithmic and demographic pricing strategies, making these protections especially beneficial. Would Black Americans be better off under this? — Banning pricing models based on race or demographic characteristics protects minority consumers from discriminatory price adjustments. Would Asian Americans be better off under this? — Asian Americans are shielded from discriminatory pricing practices based on demographic inferences. Would Hispanic Americans be better off under this? — Prohibiting demographic-based dynamic pricing protects Hispanic consumers from discriminatory pricing practices. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — Middle-class shoppers are protected from unexpected price surges based on shopping times or personal data. Would Native Americans be better off under this? — Native Americans are protected from unfair pricing adjustments driven by personal data and demographic profiling. Would people with disabilities be better off under this? — The bill explicitly protects and preserves discounts offered based on disability status. Would retired people be better off under this? — Retirees benefit from prohibitions on variable pricing and the explicit protection of senior discounts. Would people over 65 be better off under this? — Seniors are protected from potentially exploitative individualized pricing and retain access to specific public discounts. Would students be better off under this? — The bill explicitly preserves public discounts offered to students and educators. Would veterans be better off under this, taking everything together? — The bill explicitly preserves public discounts offered based on military or veteran status. Would children be better off under this? — Preventing dynamic and personalized price gouging on groceries helps protect household budgets that support children. Would immigrants be better off under this? — Immigrants are protected from demographic-based price discrimination by large grocery retailers. Would people in middle age be better off under this? — Middle-aged consumers benefit from standardized pricing protections at large retail food stores. Would people in cities be better off under this? — Urban residents shopping at large retail food stores benefit from bans on surge pricing tied to local commuting schedules. Would white Americans be better off under this? — All consumers, including white Americans, benefit from standard, non-discriminatory grocery pricing rules. Would women be better off under this? — Women, who frequently handle household grocery shopping, are protected from algorithmic price discrimination. Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this? — Young adults benefit from fair, transparent grocery pricing free from algorithmic surge pricing.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this protect people from being watched or searched? — Prohibiting large retailers from using personal purchase history, location, and biometric data to set variable prices directly protects consumer privacy. Does this leave more decisions to the states? — The bill explicitly preserves state authority to enact and enforce consumer pricing laws that offer greater protections than federal law. Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — The bill mandates clear, generally available pricing and restricts hidden, data-driven price adjustments, improving market transparency.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices? — The bill prohibits large grocery stores from using individualized pricing, dynamic pricing, and facial recognition technology to set prices, enhancing consumer protection.
- Education And Technology
- Does this give people more control over their personal data? — The legislation bans the use of biometric data, facial recognition, and personal data to determine or adjust grocery prices, strengthening individual privacy rights.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this narrow racial gaps in how people are treated? — By banning dynamic pricing and individualized pricing based on demographic characteristics such as race or ethnicity, the bill helps prevent discriminatory pricing practices.
- 10/22/2026
- Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
- Introduced in House