Family advocates urge separate ‘algorithmic protection’ fund from online-harms settlements

Del. Delia Rosenberg urged the House Appropriations Committee to report favorably on House Bill 7-15, which would create a separate restitution fund for any state recovery from litigation or settlements with online services alleged to have addictive effects on children. Rosenberg said the proposal follows precedents for tobacco and opioid settlements and would ensure dollars are used to address harms that prompted a suit rather than flow into the general fund.

The sponsor framed the measure as a targeted fiscal mechanism: if the state receives funds from lawsuits or judgments against providers of online material deemed addictive for young children, those dollars would be dedicated to prevention and treatment programs rather than general revenues. Rosenberg told the committee the key is creating a discrete fund with explicit allowable uses so future appropriations align with the harms being addressed.

Christine McComas, who identified herself as the mother of the girl for whom “Grace’s Law” is named, urged passage and suggested renaming the proposed fund the “algorithmic protection fund” to emphasize prevention and education. McComas described attending bellwether trials and congressional testimony and said discovery shows executives and product designers were aware of youth harms. “The monies to be collected in this fund are desperately needed,” she said in testimony to the committee.

Anne Geddes of the Mental Health Association of Maryland supported the bill “with an amendment,” proposing that any unspent dollars flow to the consortium on coordinated community supports for school behavioral health services. Geddes provided program reach and outcome figures and warned consortium funding has been at risk in recent budgets, arguing a reliable funding source from any future restitutions could sustain school-based behavioral health services.

Committee members pressed the sponsor on allowable uses, timing and how the Legislature’s fiscal staff and spending-affordability rules could interact with the proposed fund. Several delegates said they support the concept but wanted clear statutory language about how money could be allocated and whether other budget mechanisms could override the fund in practice. Rosenberg said she is open to drafting changes and coordinating with other sponsors and committees.

The committee did not take a final vote on the bill at the hearing; members asked staff to confer with the sponsor and interested parties on precise fund language and the proposed amendment directing unspent dollars to school behavioral-health supports.