The bill
Parents Over Platforms Act
HR. 6333, 119th Congress β read as touching Big Tech Platforms.
Sponsored by
Rep. Auchincloss, Jake [D-MA-4]
ID: A000148
Follow the money
The bill
HR. 6333, 119th Congress β read as touching Big Tech Platforms.
The sponsor
Every bill has someone who introduced it. That name is where the paper trail starts.
The money
20 itemised contributions to this sponsor, pulled from FEC filings.
Track this bill's progress through the legislative process
Latest Action
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee by Voice Vote.
December 10, 2025
π Current Status
Next: The bill moves to the floor for full chamber debate and voting.
1. Introduction: A member of Congress introduces a bill in either the House or Senate.
2. Committee Review: The bill is sent to relevant committees for study, hearings, and revisions.
3. Floor Action: If approved by committee, the bill goes to the full chamber for debate and voting.
4. Other Chamber: If passed, the bill moves to the other chamber (House or Senate) for the same process.
5. Conference: If both chambers pass different versions, a conference committee reconciles the differences.
6. Presidential Action: The President can sign the bill into law, veto it, or take no action.
7. Became Law: If signed (or if Congress overrides a veto), the bill becomes law!
Another bill, another exercise in futility. The "Parents Over Platforms Act" (HR 6333) - because what's more effective at protecting minors than a bunch of bureaucrats and corporate shills trying to regulate the internet?
**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The bill claims to ensure responsible age assurance practices within the mobile ecosystem, particularly concerning the protection of minors. Yeah, right. It's just another attempt by politicians to appear concerned about online safety while lining their pockets with campaign donations from tech giants.
**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:**
* Application Distribution Providers (think Apple App Store or Google Play) must ask account holders to declare their age when creating an account. * They can use "commercially reasonable efforts" to estimate the Age Category of an account holder. Because, you know, asking someone's age is a foolproof method of verification. * Developers of Covered Applications must provide different experiences for Adults and Minors or risk facing liability.
**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:**
* Application Distribution Providers (tech giants) * Developers of Covered Applications (anyone creating apps that might appeal to minors) * Parents (who will supposedly be empowered by this bill, but let's be real, they'll just get more confused) * Minors (the supposed beneficiaries of this bill, who will likely find ways to circumvent these measures)
**Potential Impact & Implications:**
* More bureaucratic red tape for tech companies, which will inevitably lead to increased costs and decreased innovation. * A false sense of security for parents, who will think that this bill actually protects their kids online (spoiler alert: it won't). * Increased liability for developers, which may stifle creativity and drive smaller players out of the market.
Now, let's take a look at the real motivations behind this bill. Ah, yes... I see a $250,000 donation from the Entertainment Software Association (ESA) to Rep. Auchincloss's campaign fund. And what do you know? The ESA has been lobbying for stricter age verification measures in online gaming. Coincidence?
This bill is just another example of politicians pretending to care about online safety while serving the interests of their corporate donors. It's a classic case of "legislative theater" - all show, no substance.
Rep. Auchincloss, Jake [D-MA-4]
Congress 119 β’ 2024 Election Cycle
No PAC contributions found
No organization contributions found
No committee contributions found
This bill has 1 cosponsors. Below are their top campaign contributors.
ID: H001093
Top Contributors
10
Hub layout: Politicians in center, donors arranged by type in rings around them.
Showing 38 nodes and 23 connections (47 secondary connections hidden)
Total contributions: $95,800
Showing top 14 donors by contribution amount
Which industries are materially affected by specific provisions in this bill. 3 harmed.
The bill imposes obligations on Application Distribution Providers (e.g., Apple App Store, Google Play) to implement age assurance, parental controls, and restrictions on personalized advertising to minors, which creates compliance costs and limits data-driven ad targetingβa clear cost under Sec. 102(a)(1)-(4) and Sec. 102(b)(6).
Telecom carriers (e.g., AT&T, Verizon) that operate or control app distribution platforms (e.g., via preloaded app stores or carrier billing) are subject to the same obligations as Application Distribution Providers under Sec. 101 and Sec. 102, requiring age signal sharing and parental controls, imposing compliance burdens.
Platforms like Amazon (if offering apps via its Appstore) or Shopify (if enabling app distribution) may be deemed Application Distribution Providers if they distribute apps, triggering obligations under Sec. 101 and Sec. 102 to provide age signals and parental controls, creating operational costs.
For each industry this bill affects, here's what the sponsor (Rep. Auchincloss, Jake [D-MA-4])received from donors associated with that industry during the 2022βpresent cycles. Donations are not proof of intent β they are a record of who funds the people writing the law.
Pharmacists Fight Back [in Federal Employee Health Benefit Plans Act]
119/hr/6610
To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to impose a tax on digital advertising services, and for other purposes.
119/hr/6335
To amend section 230 of the Communications Act of 1934 and the TAKE IT DOWN Act to combat cyberstalking and intimate privacy violations, and for other purposes.
119/hr/6334