Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Consumer Protection topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
House passes committee report on surveillance‑pricing and wage‑setting bill after heavy amendment fight
Summary
Lawmakers passed HB1210 as amended, which restricts use of certain online 'surveillance data' in setting individualized consumer prices and employee wages; sponsors said the measure targets exploitative algorithmic pricing, while opponents called parts overly broad or vague for employers and businesses.
Representatives Mabry and Bacon led debate on House Bill 12‑10, which sponsors described as a consumer protection response to so‑called surveillance pricing and 'veil wage setting' — practices where companies use browsing histories, geolocation and inferred online behaviors in algorithms to set individualized prices or compensation. Sponsors said the bill would classify exploitative uses of surveillance data as deceptive trade practices and give the Attorney General enforcement authority while carving out loyalty programs, subscription exemptions and required financial application documents.
Floor debate centered on definitions, enforceability and the potential to capture routine business analytics or employer tools. Several members argued the bill's language risked ensnaring legitimate employer practices — such as scheduling, performance measurement or market‑based wage factors — or imposing costly compliance burdens that could be passed to consumers. Representative Richardson and others proposed amendments to require AG rulemaking, clearer compliance guidance and higher thresholds for enforcement; sponsors and supporters said delaying enforcement or narrowing standards would undermine the statute’s ability to address black‑box algorithmic abuse.
The body adopted several sponsor amendments narrowing online behavior definitions and exempting certain categories (L003, L004) but rejected multiple member amendments aimed at constraining AG rulemaking or adding a high knowledge/substantial‑impact threshold (L007, L006, L010, L011, L008, L012). After those votes the Committee of the Whole report was adopted and the chamber recorded that House Bill 12‑10, as amended, passed on second reading.
Next steps: HB1210 moves to final passage; sponsors said they will continue stakeholder engagement and AG coordination on rules and guidance to operationalize definitions and exemptions.
