Transcript Highlights:

• claim to be protecting. claim to be protecting.
• Data protection assessments must identify and weigh the benefits may flow consumers to what is reasonably
• Section 2415J provides that the bill will be enforced through the Consumer Protection Act.
• Section 2415K is a consumer health section and provides additional protections for consumer health data
• VPIRG, Consumer Protection Advocate for VPIRG, Consumer Protection Advocate for VPIRG, De-identified

Keywords: 926, house, all

Summary: The House first took up House Bill 955, relating to next steps in transforming Vermont’s education system. The chamber suspended rules to consider the Senate proposal of amendment immediately, and the House Education Committee reported that while it appreciated the Senate’s work, differences remained on issues including the timing of class size minimums, possible tuition or fees under the foundation formula, school construction details, and merger committee groupings. The committee voted 11-0-0 to refuse concurrence and request a committee of conference. After a brief correction on the committee straw poll, the House voted to refuse concurrence in the Senate amendment and appointed Representatives Conlin, Kornheiser, and Quimby as the House conferees. The House then suspended rules to message its action to the Senate forthwith. The House next took up Senate Bill 71, the consumer data privacy and online surveillance bill. The Commerce and Economic Development Committee recommended amendment, and the floor report described the bill as creating a comprehensive Vermont data privacy law effective January 1, 2028. The report outlined consumer rights to know, access, correct, delete, and port personal data, and to opt out of targeted advertising and sale of data; duties for controllers and processors; limits on sensitive data use; special protections for minors and health-related geofencing; Attorney General enforcement; and an 18-month cure period. The committee heard extensive testimony from a broad range of advocates, industry representatives, privacy experts, and other stakeholders, and it reported the bill out favorably with amendment on a vote of 11-0-0 before the House recessed for dinner.

Transcript Highlights:

• > and Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and Republican
• financial protection laws, but consumer financial protection laws, but consumer financial<01:00:
• :04:49.200> is Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is
• Bureau's Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's overdraft
• 02:15:02.400> Protection in the Consumer Financial Protection in the Consumer Financial Protection

Keywords: U.S. House of Representatives Floor Proceedings on Wednesday, April 9, 2025, 1012, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• This is as much a public safety bill as it is a consumer protection bill.
• This is as much a public safety bill as it is a consumer protection bill.
• I think it strikes a fair balance for consumer protection, but not being too overly burdensome to our
• As the Senate Chair of the Committee on Consumer Protection and Professional Licensure, I believe that
• And this makes sure that in the event of a merger or acquisition, consumers are protected and users are

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Senate opened with the Pledge of Allegiance, recognized several guests in the chamber, and adopted a resolution congratulating Coleman-Nee on election as National Commander of the Disabled American Veterans. It also took up several local and personnel matters, including a sick leave bank for Emily Cullick and later Paul Stavarski, and local bills affecting the town of Weston and a Dorchester housing/library procurement exemption; those measures were advanced to third reading or engrossment as appropriate. The chamber also suspended Joint Rule 12 to refer several House petitions to committees. The main business was Senate No. 2516, the Massachusetts Data Privacy Act, which came before the Senate on a Ways and Means substitute (Senate Document 2608). Senators Creem, Moore, Charles, Feingold, Keenan, and others spoke in support, describing the bill as a comprehensive consumer privacy measure with data minimization rules, limits on sensitive data, protections for minors, and strong Attorney General enforcement. Several amendments were debated, with many rejected or withdrawn, while some were adopted, including provisions on geolocation data protections, opting out of targeted advertising, affiliate and merger/acquisition protections, internal operations exemptions, parental access to child data, and a Ways and Means amendment. A number of other amendments on employee data, union data, loyalty programs, AI training, reporting, and related issues were either not adopted or held/withdrawn. After the amendment process, the Senate adopted the amended Ways and Means substitute and ordered the bill to a third reading. The bill was then passed to be engrossed on a roll call vote of 40-0. The Senate also adopted an order to adjourn to the following Monday at 11:00 a.m. and to dispense with printing a calendar. The session adjourned in memory of Darrow Logan Alexander of South Boston.

Transcript Highlights:

• c> and<00:22:31.799> the consumer protection type issues and the consumer protection type
• c> is consumers so consumer protection is consumers so consumer protection is really<00:30:18.000
• protect consumers so our that next up to protect consumers so our consumer<00:44:42.200> division<
• trust consumer protection and anti trust consumer protection and anti trust Bureau<03:48:54.080><
• > also consumer protection enforcement we also consumer protection enforcement we also you<03:

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The meeting began with introductory remarks for new and returning members of the House Commerce Committee, led by Chairman John Hunt. Members briefly introduced themselves and their backgrounds, and several noted the committee’s bipartisan, collegial tone. Hunt explained the committee’s structure and traditions, including the division into three subcommittees: banking and business, consumer protection, and liquor commission matters, with insurance now handled as a single area. He also reviewed basic hearing procedures, including decorum, questions for information only, and the committee’s practice of moving bills through subcommittees before full committee executive sessions. The committee then heard an overview from the New Hampshire Insurance Department, led by Commissioner DJ Bettencourt and staff. The department described its mission as promoting a safe and competitive insurance marketplace and emphasized consumer protection, market competition, and affordability. Officials outlined the department’s responsibilities, including licensing insurers, producers, adjusters, and TPAs; reviewing insurance forms; regulating companies and market conduct; overseeing financial solvency; and investigating insurance fraud. They also noted that the department is self-funded through assessments on insurers, collects premium taxes and fees for the state, and returned more than $2.7 million to companies in fiscal year 2024 due to underspending. The presentation also covered the broader regulatory framework for insurance, including the role of the National Association of Insurance Commissioners in promoting uniform standards across states and territories. Officials said New Hampshire licenses about 1,200 insurance companies and roughly 245,000 producers and adjusters, and that the department’s financial examinations are part of an accreditation system used nationwide. No votes or formal committee actions were taken in the portion provided; the session was primarily organizational and informational, with the insurance department presentation beginning the committee’s substantive work for the term.

Transcript Highlights:

• Protect our families as we're away. Just watch over us and keep us, Father.
• Senate Bill 2011 adds contracted employees of county detention facilities to the list of protected classes

Bills: SB1636, SB1584, SB1730, SB1255, SB1627, SB137, SB2062, SB1470, SB1284, SB1632, SB1594, SB2045, SB1251, SB1884, SB1250, SB1630, SB1262, SB1374, SB1292, SB1432, SB1199, SB1790, SB1481, SB1614, SB1734, SB1437, SB1489, SB1718, SB1778, SB1327, SB1372, SB1403, SB1937, SB277, SB2131, SB1749, SB1348, SB1469, SB2018, SB1931, SB1530, SB2155, SB2030, SB1926, SB2170, SB2151, SB2166, SB1213, SB1381, SB1824, SB1876, SB1728, SB1582, SB1286, SB1386, SB1708, SB1618, SB2106, SB1471, SB2139, SB2154, SB1619, SCR15, HB2786, HB2787, SB1525, SB2011, SB2159

Keywords: cold case, unsolved homicide, violent crime, case file review, law enforcement, police records, victim family, immediate family member, designated person, forensic testing, witness reinterview, investigative leads, cold case unit, unsolved murder, public safety, Title 21, Oklahoma statutes, sexual assault, evidence kits, DNA testing

Transcript Highlights:

• protections because it lacks consumer protections because it lacks any enforcement and oversight by
• That's a serious concern about consumer protection.
• Um, and so I am aware of an amendment that does add that consumer protection.
• So on the consumer protection side, you know, we keep mentioning consumer protection.
• I asked that question because when you file a consumer protection When you file a consumer protection

Keywords: 923, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• So I spent my first four years on consumer or on Commerce, so consumer protection, and it hasn't changed
• > been consumer protections where they've been consumer protections where they've been taken<00
• been<00:05:12.960> in Consumer Protections but it's been in Consumer Protections but it's
• consumer finance protection responsibilities.
• > state provide consumer protection at the state provide consumer protection at the state level<00

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Good afternoon, and welcome to the Assembly Privacy and Consumer Protection Hearing.
• So how can we make it work, protect privacy, and protect freedom of speech? But I, I...
• This is a consumer...'
• is to protect Californians' consumer privacy.
• protection.

Summary: The committee heard several privacy and consumer protection bills, with most of the discussion focused on AI and social media. AB 1405 would create a state registry for AI auditors and set basic transparency, ethics, and qualification standards for those auditors; supporters said it would build trust and provide a foundation for future AI oversight, while some members questioned whether government should define auditor qualifications instead of industry groups. The bill was moved out on a 5-1 vote to Appropriations, with the roll left open. AB 2, by Assemblymember Lowenthal, would impose enhanced financial penalties on large social media companies when their negligence causes harm to children and teens. Supporters, including a grieving parent and Common Sense Media, argued the bill would create accountability for harmful algorithms and design choices, while opponents from TechNet, EFF, CCIA, and CalChamber warned it was vague, could chill speech, invite censorship, and raise Section 230 and First Amendment concerns. Committee members debated private right of action versus public enforcement, possible shakedown lawsuits, and whether the bill should be narrowed; the bill passed 6-0 to Judiciary with the roll left open. AB 410 would expand California’s bot disclosure law so bots must identify themselves up front and truthfully if asked, rather than only prohibiting deceptive bots in limited commercial or election contexts. Supporters said the measure would help users, especially youth and vulnerable people, know when they are interacting with AI and reduce deception online; one privacy group withdrew opposition after amendments, and other industry groups said they were no longer opposed or had no formal position. The bill passed 9-1 to Appropriations with the roll left open. The committee also approved AB 1327, which lets consumers cancel home improvement contracts by email instead of only by mail and requires phone assistance for cancellations; the Contractor State License Board withdrew opposition after amendments, and the bill passed 11-0 to Judiciary with the roll left open.

Transcript Highlights:

• This is a question of consumer satisfaction, not consumer protection.
• This is a question of consumer satisfaction, not consumer protection.
• important consumer protection bills for this country.
• The BCE is necessary for consumer protection, and their bill has many important consumer protection improvements
• Strong consumer protections are also critical.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm going to call the Assembly Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee to order.
• Welcome to the Assembly Consumer Protection and Privacy Committee.
• Welcome to the Assembly Consumer Protection and Privacy Committee.
• This bill seeks to add consumer protections, important consumer protections for car purchasers and car
• been working so hard on consumer protections in this space for so long.

Summary: The committee heard several AI- and consumer-protection-related bills, with extensive testimony from authors, supporters, and industry opponents. SB 53 by Senator Wiener would create transparency requirements for large AI developers, including disclosure of safety and security protocols, reporting of critical safety incidents, whistleblower protections, and the CalCompute public cloud. Supporters said it is a narrower, transparency-based follow-up to last year’s vetoed AI safety bill, while opponents argued it still relies too much on company size, could expose trade secrets, and should be narrowed further. The committee approved SB 53 on a do-pass-as-amended vote to Appropriations, with the roll held open for absent members. SB 766 by Senator Allen would codify the FTC’s Cars Rule and create a three-day cooling-off period for certain used-car purchases, along with stronger disclosure rules on pricing, add-ons, and government affiliation claims. Supporters said it would save consumers money and time and help buyers avoid bad deals, while dealer and industry groups said amendments addressed many of their concerns. Several former opponents moved to neutral, and the committee passed SB 766 unanimously as amended to Appropriations. SB 7 by Senator McNerney would regulate automated decision-making systems in employment by requiring notice, human review for discipline and termination, and limits on predictive behavior analysis. Labor and consumer advocates supported the bill as a safeguard against biased or overly automated workplace decisions, while employer and industry groups raised concerns about scope, notice burdens, and the predictive-analysis ban. The committee passed SB 7 to Appropriations on a 4-2 vote, with the roll held open. SB 833, also by Senator McNerney, would require human oversight of AI used in critical infrastructure, along with training and system assessments; it drew limited opposition focused on scope, and the committee passed it as amended to Appropriations on a 5-0 vote, also holding the roll open. Later, the committee took up SB 11, which would address AI-generated voice, image, and video cloning and deepfakes by clarifying likeness protections, requiring consumer warnings, and addressing misuse and evidence tampering. Supporters framed it as a targeted response to nonconsensual deepfakes, while industry groups said recent amendments improved the bill but still had concerns about penalties and warning language. The committee also heard SB 720, the Safer Streets Act, which would let cities opt into a revised red-light camera system that shifts from driver to owner liability, removes facial identification, makes violations civil rather than criminal, and directs revenue toward transportation safety projects; the author presented the bill, but the transcript ends before any final action on SB 720.

Transcript Highlights:

• Consumers are going to be protected from inadequate insurance.
• Oversight, accountability, and consumer protections to the Fair Plan, as this takes on a far larger role
• That mismatch has created serious gaps in coverage, governance, and consumer protection.
• The motion is due pass to the Committee on Privacy, Digital Technologies, and Consumer Protection.
• The motion is due pass to the Committee on Privacy and Consumer Protection.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Murphy, we dealt with a number of consumer protection issues like this all the time.
• We are an organization dedicated to protecting consumers and fostering innovation through policy.
• He asked the committee to move forward and help protect consumers and the legal system.
• We have implemented that voluntarily to protect consumers, so I believe the story that the detective
• That said, we feel that this bill strikes a good balance between consumer protections and innovation,

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several financial services bills, with the main focus on cryptocurrency kiosk regulation, financial literacy, and earned wage access. Legislators and witnesses described widespread crypto-related scams targeting older adults, often involving impersonation, urgency, spoofed phone numbers, and rapid transfers through kiosks that are difficult to trace or recover. Supporters of the kiosk bills said Massachusetts needs licensing, registration, transaction limits, warning notices, receipts, refund protections, and other safeguards; some also urged a “pause” or hold on transactions to give victims time to reconsider and allow law enforcement to intervene. The Attorney General’s office, AARP, local law enforcement, and several prosecutors and sheriffs backed the consumer-protection approach, while Bitcoin Depot supported a narrower regulatory framework but opposed low fee caps and strict daily limits, arguing they would function like a ban and reduce legitimate use. Witnesses from Waltham police, Middlesex and Essex County law enforcement, and the AG’s office said crypto scams are growing quickly, losses are often unrecoverable once funds move, and current tools are limited. They described cases involving elderly victims losing thousands of dollars, and said warnings alone are not enough because scammers keep victims on the phone and guide them through the process. Some witnesses said a temporary hold or refund mechanism has worked in at least one case, while others emphasized that transaction limits and visible disclosures could reduce harm even if they do not stop fraud entirely. The AG’s office also said it would submit written opposition to separate earned wage advance legislation, while DailyPay testified in support of that bill, saying earned wage access helps workers bridge short-term gaps without debt or credit reporting. The committee also heard support for mandatory financial literacy education from Representative Jim Hawkins, who said high school students need instruction on credit, debt, and inflation before they enter adulthood. In addition, the committee took testimony on litigation financing bills from insurance industry representatives, who argued for disclosure and regulation of predatory litigation lending and warned about foreign interference and reduced plaintiff recoveries. No votes or final actions were taken during the hearing; members asked questions throughout, and the chair noted the need to move testimony along because of time constraints.

Transcript Highlights:

• This bill was requested by the DOJ to ensure their fraud and consumer protection division is made aware
• This bill was requested by the DOJ to ensure that their fraud and consumer protection division is made
• Since that codification, the legislature has added additional consumer protections in Chapters 25A all
• Would that be covered under the consumer protection at that point?
• We do share the goal of protecting consumers from deceptive AI practices.

Summary: The committee heard several bills, but much of the meeting focused on House Bill 306, which would require disclosure when a consumer is interacting with a chatbot rather than a human. Sponsor Senator Townsend described it as a consumer protection measure and said the bill is meant to keep pace with rapidly changing AI technology. Committee members and witnesses raised concerns about the bill’s enforcement structure, especially private rights of action and penalties that could apply even without actual consumer harm. The Department of Justice said the bill would apply where the conduct has a Delaware nexus, and that the disclosure requirement is the key consumer protection. Industry witnesses and chambers of commerce opposed the bill as drafted, arguing it would create broad compliance burdens and expose businesses to excessive litigation risk without a harm requirement or clearer safe harbor language. Earlier in the meeting, the committee discussed House Bill 429, which would update Delaware’s step therapy exception process to include biosimilars and interchangeable biologics. Senator Poore and supporters from Highmark and the Department of Insurance said the bill would modernize insurance law, improve access to effective treatments, and reduce costs; they cited national savings from biosimilars and said the bill has agency support. Members asked about Delaware-specific savings, patient switching, and how the process would work, but no vote was taken during the discussion. The committee also heard House Bill 310, which would exclude large data centers from Blue Collar Jobs Act tax credits; the sponsor said the bill is intended to ensure large energy users contribute more to state and local revenues, while supporters and opponents debated competitiveness and community impacts. House Bill 406, on allowing insureds to choose their auto repair shop, and Senate Bill 347, a cleanup bill related to medical debt collection and personal property levies, were also presented without opposition in the hearing. House Bill 253, concerning who may receive letters testamentary or of administration, was described as a cleanup to align statute with existing practice. The committee approved the meeting minutes, but the transcript does not show final votes on the bills discussed.

Transcript Highlights:

• Consumer Consumer Protection<00:11:34.399> okay<00:11:35.399> you<00:11:35.519> can
• trust the consumer protection and anti trust the consumer protection and anti trust Bureau<00
• <00:49:07.799> legal consumer is protected and the legal consumer is protected and the legal
• That would be under consumer protection anyways.
• <01:42:03.560> protection ones who handle the consumer protection ones who handle the consumer

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The committee heard testimony on HB 733-FN, a bill concerning third-party litigation financing (TPLF). Representative Cole, the prime sponsor, described TPLF as outside investors funding lawsuits in which they have no personal stake, arguing that the practice is largely unregulated, can involve foreign entities, increases litigation abuse, and contributes to higher insurance and consumer costs. He said the bill is modeled on an NCOIL proposal and would require disclosure of TPLF agreements, with guardrails and reporting requirements on specified pages of the bill. He also noted a couple of drafting fixes, including adding the word “knowingly” and incorporating a missing section later. Members raised questions about the bill’s foreign-entity language, especially the provision allowing a governor or the Department of Safety to designate a country as a threat to critical infrastructure. Representative Cole said he would have lawyers review that issue. Another member asked whether the bill would prohibit a party from obtaining outside funding for a lawsuit; Cole clarified that the bill is intended as a reporting measure, not a ban, and that disclosure would be required. He also said the bill is aimed at American citizens rather than foreign-backed financing, and that some states had considered caps on such arrangements, though this bill does not. Brandon Gratz of the Attorney General’s office testified that the enforcement language appears too limited, because it would allow only civil penalties and not broader Consumer Protection Act remedies such as injunctions or restitution. He suggested the Attorney General may not have meaningful authority under the bill as written and raised possible insurance-law issues. Commissioner D.J. Benton-Court of the Insurance Department said the disclosure could help insurers better assess risk and potentially soften the hard insurance market by improving transparency, competition, underwriting, innovation, and claims management. He also said the bill likely needs further work on jurisdiction and enforcement, and that the committee may need to coordinate with the Attorney General, Insurance Department, and possibly banking regulators. No vote was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Welcome to Assembly Privacy and Consumer Protection. We have eight bills on the agenda today.
• Welcome to Assembly Privacy and Consumer Protection. We have eight bills on the agenda today.
• This is the consumer protection issue. It's also a cybersecurity issue.
• We need to inform consumers about these issues so they can protect themselves.
• SB 435 is a critical piece of pro-consumer legislation that will protect consumer information and increase

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• That is not consumer protection.
• That is not consumer protection.
• That is not consumer protection.
• Um it substantial consumer protection.
• <00:42:32.960> Protection Senate Commerce and Consumer Protection Senate Commerce and Consumer

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Welcome to Assembly Privacy and Consumer Protection. We have eight bills on the agenda today.
• Welcome to Assembly Privacy and Consumer Protection. We have eight bills on the agenda today.
• This is the consumer protection issue. It's also a cybersecurity issue.
• We need to inform consumers about these issues so they can protect themselves.
• SB 435 is a critical piece of pro-consumer legislation that will protect consumer information and increase

Summary: The committee began as a subcommittee due to the lack of a quorum and heard several privacy- and technology-related measures. The first item was H.R. 117, a resolution urging Congress to reform Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. The author and supporters argued the law is outdated and shields platforms from accountability for harms such as harassment, exploitation, scams, and other online abuse. Witnesses, including a survivor parent and a gender justice advocate, described harms to children, women, and LGBTQ people and urged a two-year sunset to force federal reform. Some members supported the resolution as a call for federal action, while one member said he could not support it because the resolution was too general and lacked specificity about the reforms being sought. No vote was taken because the committee lacked a quorum. The committee then heard SB 898, which would require manufacturers of connected consumer products to disclose how long they will support the software and to notify consumers when products approach end of life. The author said consumers deserve transparency about security updates and continued functionality, and supporters from Consumer Reports and PIRG emphasized cybersecurity risks, consumer confusion, and electronic waste from unsupported devices. Opponents, including business and industry groups, raised concerns about enforcement through the unfair competition law, notice burdens, labeling issues, and compliance challenges, especially for products with long support windows or third-party dependencies. One member expressed support, noting the cybersecurity risks of end-of-life devices, but again no vote was taken because there was no quorum. The committee also heard SB 435, which would narrow the CCPA definition of publicly available information to limit how businesses classify data as public. The author and supporters said the bill would close a loophole that allows data brokers and others to monetize personal information without meaningful consent and could help prevent surveillance and misuse of data, including by government agencies. Opponents argued the bill would upset the balance between privacy and the free flow of information, create compliance uncertainty, and retroactively reclassify information that businesses reasonably believed was public. Some members said they supported the goal of stronger privacy protections, while others said the bill was too broad. The committee again could not vote due to the lack of a quorum. Later, the committee heard SB 923, which would expand Californians’ right to delete personal information to cover data obtained from third parties and require online businesses to offer a web form or similar method for deletion requests. Supporters, including the California Privacy Protection Agency and consumer advocates, said the bill would make deletion rights meaningful and better address data broker practices. Opponents sought an opt-out-of-processing alternative and raised operational and legal concerns, but supporters said deletion is not the same as retention or processing limits. Members largely spoke in favor of the bill’s privacy goals, but no action was taken. The committee also heard SB 947, the “No Robo Bosses Act,” which would require human review for certain automated employment decisions and limit predictive analysis in workplace discipline and termination. Labor groups supported the bill as a safeguard against biased or erroneous AI-driven decisions, while business, public employer, and local government groups opposed it as overbroad and burdensome. Members voiced support for human oversight in employment decisions, but the item was not voted on because the committee still lacked a quorum. Finally, the committee began hearing SB 1114, the SOGI Data Privacy Act, which would restrict disclosure of sexual orientation, gender identity, and intersex data to federal agencies absent a court order or legal requirement; the author and witness framed it as a response to federal efforts to obtain sensitive LGBTQ-related data.

Transcript Highlights:

• You know, when President Obama was in office, there was a consumer protection agency set up.
• In the Consumer Protection Division, we protect the legitimate business community from deceptive business
• In the Consumer Protection Division, we handle anything with consumer transactions.
• A quick question, but I want to say that your consumer protection division has done a great job.
• So we're excited about that and with some additional consumer protection for Arkansasans.

Keywords: 1204, all

Summary: A joint House-Senate Insurance and Commerce meeting focused on the growing threat of financial fraud in Arkansas, with members hearing from bankers, the Attorney General’s office, the state bank and securities commissioner, the insurance department, AARP, and mortgage industry representatives. Witnesses described fraud as increasingly organized, technology-driven, and often transnational, with common schemes including spoofed bank calls and texts, fake websites and social media impersonations, business email compromise, gift card and wire scams, crypto kiosk fraud, check fraud, and mortgage/real estate fraud. Several witnesses emphasized that seniors are disproportionately targeted and that losses are often underreported because victims feel embarrassed or do not know where to report incidents. Testimony highlighted both state and national responses. Bankers and regulators pointed to Arkansas’s 2025 actions on crypto ATMs and elder-fraud education, including training for gift-card sellers and safe-harbor protections for banks under the Safe AR Act. The Attorney General’s Consumer Protection Division described its complaint process, a new financial fraud task force, and examples of recovered funds, including quick recoveries from Bitcoin kiosk scams and wire fraud cases. The American Bankers Association and others urged stronger accountability for telecoms and social media platforms, citing spoofed caller ID, impersonation ads, Section 230 issues, and the need for a national scam-prevention strategy or federal office. Artificial intelligence was identified as a major emerging risk because it can generate convincing scam emails, websites, and impersonation content at scale. Members asked about reporting procedures, whether banks reimburse fraud losses, how crypto affects recoverability, the safety of tap-to-pay versus chip use, and whether public online records contribute to fraud. Witnesses generally advised victims to report scams through the proper channels, avoid clicking links or responding to suspicious messages, and verify requests independently by contacting institutions directly. The committee also heard that banks and regulators are already sharing information and educating consumers, but that more legislative and cross-agency action may be needed. No formal vote or bill action was taken beyond approval of the November 3, 2025 minutes.

Transcript Highlights:

• Yeah, it's under the consumer protection laws.
• Consumer Protection Law when no federal protections exist is something that we oppose, I'm going to
• And so we share that information just to remind everyone that renters deserve consumer protections, too
• And if there are hidden fees or bad consumer practices, they should be protected under existing state
• HB 950 is a consumer protection program for elderly citizens. In the U.S.

Summary: The committee took up several House measures. HCR 66, as amended, asked Louisiana Economic Development and the Governor’s Office of Rural Development to study rural parish assets, infrastructure, workforce, and development opportunities, and it was moved forward without objection. HB 387, a clarification to allow the fire marshal’s office to review architectural and engineering plans equally, also passed favorably without objection. HB 1223, which would have LED promote Louisiana’s clinical trial capacity and adjust internal review board processes, was amended and moved favorably. HB 950, aimed at helping older adults recognize and avoid fraud through materials and resources from the Office of Elderly Affairs, was reported favorably. HB 975, a routine measure to recreate the Public Service Commission, was also reported favorably. HB 1186, which would create a more uniform statewide building code and licensing system for inspectors, was amended and moved favorably. HB 1222, described as a Grocery Initiative Act to let LED identify ways to address food deserts and food insecurity, was introduced near the end of the meeting. The most extensive debate centered on HB 617, a consumer transparency bill requiring mandatory fees to be included in upfront pricing. The author said the bill was intended to curb hidden fees and help consumers compare prices, with examples such as hotel resort fees and automatic restaurant service charges. Supporters argued it would improve transparency, while opponents from grocery, restaurant, hotel, housing, retail, and business groups said the bill was too broad, vague about terms like “total price,” unclear on enforcement and penalties, and could create compliance burdens and litigation risk, especially for small businesses. Housing advocates opposed the bill’s housing carve-out, arguing it could weaken renters’ ability to bring unfair-practice claims. Senator Morris moved to defer HB 617, and the committee agreed without objection. The committee also heard lengthy testimony on HB 797, which would create a Bayou Gold certification for certain transactional gold vendors that meet state-defined standards such as segregation, insurance, and nearby storage. The sponsor said the goal was to give consumers confidence and encourage vendors to keep gold closer to Louisiana, while critics argued the program would amount to a state endorsement of private companies, create misleading consumer impressions, and expose the state to confusion or liability. The bill drew opposition from the Sound Money Defense League and others, but the committee ultimately reported HB 797 favorably, with the understanding it still had to go to Finance. HB 1228, a hearing-aid cleanup bill updating definitions, contracts, testing periods, and licensing rules, was also moved favorably without objection.

Transcript Highlights:

• These reforms are straightforward, and they are consumer protections.
• These reforms are straightforward, and they are consumer protections.
• So I've taken a series of actions to enforce robust consumer protection laws, including long-standing
• Our job is to protect consumers, protect our market. That's it. And we need to do that with data.
• Are you going to protect consumers for a year?

Summary: The committee first heard AB 597, a bill to strengthen consumer protections for disaster survivors who use public adjusters. The author and the Department of Insurance said the measure would cap public adjuster fees at 15% for claims tied to declared disasters, require clearer contracts, prohibit solicitation during emergency conditions, and allow consumers to rescind contracts that were solicited during prohibited periods. Insurance industry groups supported the bill, while public adjuster representatives opposed it as written but said they were willing to work on revisions. The committee approved the bill and re-referred it to Appropriations; the roll call was ultimately recorded as 16-0. The committee then held its fourth oversight hearing on the Department of Insurance’s Sustainable Insurance Strategy, with Commissioner Ricardo Lara giving an extensive update on wildfire-related market reforms and consumer protections. He said the recent Southern California wildfires had not derailed the strategy and described actions including advance claim payments, a one-year moratorium on residential non-renewals in affected areas, a new fraud strike team, smoke-damage claim guidance, additional living expense protections, and a consumer claims tracker. He reported more than $12.1 billion in claims paid, over 37,000 claims filed, and more than 7,000 survivors assisted directly. He also discussed related bills and reforms, including AB 597, SB 495, SB 547, SB 429, SB 616, AB 888, and AB 2026. Members questioned the commissioner about the Fair Plan’s growing exposure, the $1 billion assessment, rate increases, non-renewals, underinsurance, and whether the reforms would actually stabilize the market. Lara said the assessment was already approved, that policyholders would not be hit with one large bill because insurers have two years to recover costs, and that the department was pushing insurers to use catastrophe modeling and reinsurance tools in exchange for commitments to write more policies in wildfire-distressed areas. He said the department expects to see market stabilization by 2026, though he emphasized the timeline depends on insurer participation, implementation of the new regulations, and future disaster activity. Members generally expressed support for the goals of the strategy while pressing for clearer expectations for consumers and faster action on mitigation and market reform.