Posted on Mar 14, 2017 by Caleb Chen

These are the 17 House Representatives that introduced a bill to let telecoms sell your personal internet history

telecoms rep

Most Americans don’t know that telecoms and internet service providers store the internet history of their users; even more don’t know that recently introduced legislation aims to do away with privacy protections on this high value data. For years, the telecom industry has lobbied the government for the ability to sell your internet history to the highest bidder. On 3/7/17, Senator Jeff Flake and 22 other co-sponsors introduced S.J.Res 34, which would use the Congressional Review Act to strip away privacy protections voted in by the FCC last year and allow telecoms to sell the private internet history which they have on each of their Internet subscribers. One day later, on 3/8/17, Representative Marsha Blackburn introduced the House version of the bill (H.J.Res 86).

17 House Representatives that support a bill to let telecoms sell your internet history

Including the bill’s headliner, Representative Blackburn, the 17 House Representatives are:

– Rep. Flores, Bill [R-TX-17]

– Rep. Blackburn, Marsha [R-TN-7]

– Rep. Olson, Pete [R-TX-22]

– Rep. Lance, Leonard [R-NJ-7]

– Rep. Scalise, Steve [R-LA-1]

– Rep. Latta, Robert E. [R-OH-5]

– Rep. Guthrie, Brett [R-KY-2]

– Rep. Kinzinger, Adam [R-IL-16]

– Rep. Johnson, Bill [R-OH-6]

– Rep. Long, Billy [R-MO-7]

– Rep. Brooks, Susan W. [R-IN-5]

– Rep. Walters, Mimi [R-CA-45]

– Rep. Cramer, Kevin [R-ND-At Large]

– Rep. Collins, Chris [R-NY-27]

– Rep. Costello, Ryan A. [R-PA-6]

– Rep. Bilirakis, Gus M. [R-FL-12]

– Rep. Shimkus, John [R-IL-15]

Before the (I’m just a) bill is presented to President Trump to sign into law, both S.J.Res 34 and H.J.Res 86 need to make it through their respective chambers of Congress. Letting your House Representative and Senators know to vote against H.J.Res 86 and S.J.Res 34, respectively, might be the only chance to keep your personal internet history private.

Through coordinated action in both houses, the anti-privacy camp has made their move. The only thing that can hold these politicians accountable for their actions against the best interests of their constituents, is the mass action of the people. Join Private Internet Access in supporting the EFF in calling on all Americans to heed the call and make the call: “Don’t let Congress Undermine Our Online Privacy.” When both H.J.Res 86 and S.J.Res 34 come to a vote, make sure to take note of which House Representatives and Senators vote which way. It is important, now more than ever, to hold politicians accountable for their stances and their actions.

Like this article? Get notified by email when there is a new article or signup to receive the latest news in the fight for Privacy via the Online Privacy News RSS Feed.

Featured image by Gage Skidmore.

About Caleb Chen

Caleb Chen is a digital currency and privacy advocate who believes we must #KeepOurNetFree, preferably through decentralization. Caleb holds a Master's in Digital Currency from the University of Nicosia as well as a Bachelor's from the University of Virginia. He feels that the world is moving towards a better tomorrow, bit by bit by Bitcoin.

VPN Service
  • JimmyHoffa1

    So, other than this one blogger’s slanted view of the bill, are there any news outlets who’ve done their homework and can explain why this bill was introduced? Why are there 17 Representatives supporting it? None of this lobbyists pay them, “blah, blah, blah”. If you can prove that through reporting, then you do that. But this lazy reporting where you simply state what you think is garbage.

    I’m interested to know the origins of the bill, it it’s been introduced previously, and what — in its entirety — it would do.

    • checkyourdonkeydoor

      How do you know its a slanted view if you yourself don’t even know what the bill would do?

      Why not read the bill yourself? Its linked in the article.

      The bill is seeking to nullify privacy protections on consumers, the very rule that prevents your ISP from selling your browsing history.

      • Benjamin Smith

        That’s actually a relief, I thought they already did that.

      • Fyasko

        Ew, fuck Vigillink, I can’t even view that link because i’ve blocked them for malicious activity

        • Naresh Chandranatha

          What are you talking about?

    • krypt_o

      All the bill does is undo the FCC rule. Google H. J. RES. 86.

    • disqus_HWEWNjimYJ

      This is a privacy centered website and blog, why would it take a view that undermines that?

    • Shenanigan Ninja

      Did you follow the link to the bill that the blogger posted in the article? Cause it straight up goes right to the bill on the and shows a resolution to end the FCC’s “Protecting the Privacy of Customers of Broadband and Other Telecommunications Services” regulations. It’s also really difficult to see if a bill has been introduced previously because the bill itself will likely intentionally not mention if it has, because they want people to vote for it, and they don’t want people to bring up the failure of the previous bill. You’re asking this blogger to do their research, but they have. You’re just not looking through the links of the article.

    • arthasbaker

      Do you even have a brain you piece of shit?

    • Jeffrey Evans

      the article was written so we would know that it was introduced . like all articles , its up to us to do research after that . the author never promised to spoon feed you.

    • Keith kowalski

      There are no logical reasons for this other than greed.

      • Tracy Robinson

        There’s A LOT that can be done with your name attached to your internet history and it’s not all about money. Employers could possibly access it. Law enforcement agencies would certainly get access to it. Religious organizations have strong influence in politics so I could see screenings done at your churches and they don’t keep your secrets silent and are all about judgement. Remember The Fappening awhile back? Imagine more data like that with your name all over it neatly bundled up on a server ready to mine for doxxing or other malicious reasons. Of course this is all speculation but there’s little trust in the government today and the motives of the corporations.. oh, I mean our Glorious Leader.. er, the billionaire club now in control of the US.

        Just to add – I have my doubts this will happen.

  • Ryan Cole

    If it passes, you should just go and buy the data of these politicians and publish it on billboards in their districts.

    • Obviously politicians will be exempt because ‘national security’

      • Plzhelp

        Through all sources of public information, find close relatives of theirs and post their scandalous internet history!

      • Nothappening

        Except they aren’t or aren’t supposed to be exempt. This is considering that they use the same companies that us public citizens use. At this point the government is basically saying “in order for us to keep your data private and make you use VPNs or similar we are going to introduce a bill that would give telecoms the right to sell your data. However, this highly illegal because we are treating the people we should be protecting like a product or farm animal.”

      • Wrest216

        Dam neoliberalism !

  • joe smoe

    they already do this its called data mining, but the isp does not benefit.

    • ctonyperry

      Nor should they

    • siegfriedfarnon

      A specific person’s internet history with their name attached has not been available for sale previously. It’s actually pretty scary.

  • Dave


  • Frank Si

    All republicans, of course.

  • Frank Si


















    • Wes

      This is expected.

      • Greg

        Or you know, this happens on both sides of the aisles…

        • concreteblue

          Except if legislation benefits corporations and harms consumers, the R’s are unanimous.

          • Joe Reiter

            even though it is proven democrats are more likely to take gifts from lobbyist, its okay to be ignorant concrete, it means you can learn how the real world works now

          • concreteblue

            You are going to have to support that contention. Hint: Links to Breitbart, Fox “news”, Flush Rimjob, The Savage Wiener, et al do not constitute “proof”.

          • fuckface

            PERFECT example of “only my news sites are legit” of course my sites aren’t completely biased towards my beliefs and are completely even on both sides of an issue

          • concreteblue

            All the sources I cited print easily debunked bovine excrement all day, every day. I get my information from a wide spectrum of news sources, and I follow the linked source information as well. That is how I know the above listed sources are crap.

          • n3n5n1

            SOPA/PIPA supporters:
            R — 26 (12 withdrew)
            D — 37 (3 withdrew)

            SOPA/PIPA opposition:
            R — 16
            D — 5

            But yeah, continue believing the bullshit you see in media. Both parties are very eager to slide their dicks in people. It’s easier to do it if people are busy screaming at each other trying to prove their side is “better”, while in reality they’re on one side and should be working together.


          • Greg

            That is an idiotic statement at best. One word.. Solyndra…

          • MaryKBachman

            Not always true. Not here in California.

        • ScifiluvR

          not in this case

      • MaryKBachman

        Why is it expected? I’m confused why these representatives, most of whom I thougth I trusted, are pushing for this. What benefit does it give? Ughhhhh…….

    • ScifiluvR


    • n3n5n1

      If you think Democrats don’t want to spy on you, you’re in hardcore denial. Hint: PRISM was which administration? Hint: what was Obama’s stance on encryption?

      You’re thinking “us vs them” in terms of “red vs blue”. Think “us vs them” in terms of “people vs government”. While you waste your time fighting your fellow man, those upstairs watch and laugh.

      • John H

        PRISM was a Bush administration program started under the (supposed) authority granted by the USA PATRIOT Act (which was supported by most Democrats and nearly all Republicans in the House, and supported by all but one Senator, Democrat Russ Feingold – Democrats provided most of the opposition, but a strong majority of them did support it), and continued by Obama. Democrats are bad on this issue, but Republicans are categorically worse; “both sides” fails to capture the fact that there are degrees of bad, with the Republicans almost always worse.

      • Frank Si

        You’re trying to convince the wrong person. Republicans thrive on us vs them. This is a sports game to them. Instead of trying to convince me that both parties are so horrible, try convincing republicans to vote in their own interests, which would be the same ones you and I have.

        • n3n5n1

          Dude, I’m not American, I come from a significantly different part of the world. It’s pretty obvious from here how corrupt and inhuman your both parties are (although I still regard your political system as one of the best we have, but most of the other countries are even in deeper shit). You guys have to face a fake choice. If you decide to stand behind any of the parties you’ve already lost. That’s by design.

    • DFW

      Welcome to Republicanistan.

  • Chris

    Or get a VPN……

    • exbert

      Soon that will be illegal too. Because only terrorists and criminals would want to hide their internet activity.

  • Chris

    The contents of HJ Res 86 and SJ Res 34 have nothing to do with this topic. HJ Res 86 ( deals with election contributions. And SJ Res 34 ( is also totally unrelated.

  • Buk Lau

    Can’t wait to find out what type of freaky porn they’re all into in the aftermath. It’ll happen. I guarantee at least four of them are into midgets and spanking.

    • Cliff Wright

      you can’t call them midgets anymore..they are munchinamericans !

  • Read

    Southpark / so last season

  • Jeffrey Evans

    whoever gets my data will want their money back . i hope they get terms on the sale .

    • Elizabeth


  • RjPiston

    I wonder if they’ll provide an opt-out option. and if someone opts in, will there be guarantees that the data is anonymous? or i wonder if there will be a notice sent to me from my ISP saying they will be doing this? isn’t there some type of governing body that should be looking out for the consumers?…sigh…

  • Stephen

    Can I get paid for it then?

  • Norman Rockwell

    As a republican, I am appalled. Fuck these Reps. Their duty is to protect their constituents, not sell them doswn the river, I would vote D before I voted for any one of these ass clowns.

  • Jake

    Yikes. What can they get? A list of urls? Or can they somehow see the actual content?

  • timedonkey

    A Grand Jury will examine each of these reprobates and if necessary the AG can suggest ‘Water Boarding’ to find out who paid them and how much to support such a craven concept.

  • LunarD3ATH

    Oh look, Republicans. Again.

    It should be illegal to be a shill. Sadly, I don’t think a bill like that would ever get through with how many corrupt politicians there are.

  • RWW

    Oh my god!!!! They are all Republicans! Never would have guessed.

  • Insta ICandi

    Hmmm thats some food for thought. I got a lot of great and useful information at ALLSECURESOLUTIONS.COM

  • Jack Brown

    my information my money .

  • Yambe

    If it pass, it still will need the president signature

  • Dan Smith

    Sounds like the RINO’s

  • Frank

    They better hope they don’t manage to pass this. Imagine. 1. If internet history is available for sale, just buy these jerks’ history, scrutinize and publish. 2. Private internet history would have medical information including who you have coverage from and searches for your medical condition. Selling it would be a hipaa violation. Comcast has 23.3 million internet customers, that many violations, even only assuming one person per household would be one trillion one hundred sixty-five billion dollars. Aka no more Comcast. They might want to check themselves before they wreck themselves. Almost want to see this pass just so they could see financial ruin for being greedy.

  • lisa m

    FAKE NEWS! CABLE CHEN- I know Rep Chris Collins was not on this bill! Matter of fact- how many times are you going to write this and change it!?!

    • I_BZ

      That is a link to the cosponsors of the bill. Collins is the 13th name on the list. Stop screaming “fake news” when it isn’t fake news.

      It also seems you would be embarrassed that Collins is on this bill because you don’t agree with selling our privacy (otherwise why throw the tantrum). Now that it has been shown to you that he is on the bill, how does his position and actions in this instance make you feel (I’m asking this honestly and hoping for an honest answer)?

      • lisa m

        Under the same site you sent me- did you read it? Here’s the first line of the BILL you sent- ‘H.J.Res.86 – Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5’
        Here’s the WHOLE THING!
        H.J.Res.86 – Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Federal Communications Commission relating to “Protecting the Privacy of Customers of Broadband and Other Telecommunications Services”.
        Maybe, you should learn to read before you accuse me of throwing a tantrum. I’ve spoke to Collins about this bill. Obama is the one responsible for foreign and domestic finding out about our “secret business” now as it is when he signed it into one of his final acts of “good will”. I’d say, DISASTER!
        Democrats always seem to deflect it’s the Republican’s who are the spark of these bills. It’s not. It was Obama who started this bill. It’s the far left and the ones who are the neoconservative right who want this done because they think President Trump can’t get the job done. If this crap about Russia keeps going, surely we can see they’ll keep ignoring what Hillary did with the Uranium sold to the Russians and ignore what Obama tried to do with Palestine and send $240+ billion before he left. Come on. I may have been born at night. NOT LAST NIGHT.

        • I_BZ

          I’m going to try to stay on point. We’re saying the same thing here. Collins is on the list of reps that are voting to reverse, albeit very recent action, from former POTUS Obama. Collins’ name is not on the original legislation that Obama put out. But his name is on the motion to reverse it (in their words “disapproval”), which is what this article is about. It’s covering the people that want to reverse the existing legislation.

          Arguing the importance and nature of the vote is fine and your right, but I just don’t understand why you were aggressively debating whether his name was not on something when it clearly was, and it’s bothersome when political discussion gets clouded by “FAKE NEWS”, when you could just present your opposing opinion clearly and succinctly instead of going on a tangent (ironic because now I’m on a tangent). Who knows, you may actually develop a useful dialogue.

  • David A Kistner

    lets just obtain all the senate’s and house’s member’s information and make it public, we could also just harass them days in and days out until they’re just tired of it pass laws to protect the people they represent instead of selling out to corporate interests. *i suggest we just make their info public and troll the fuck out of that info regardless

  • Johnny Bigrig

    I don’t think you people realize how important it is not to politicize this issue. If you turn it into Rep vs. Dem, then a lot of people who would otherwise be sickened by this, regardless of their conservative leanings, might feel the need to rally for the bill because it’s now “us against them” “red vs. blue.”

    Trust me, plenty of Democrats are willing to sell you out to the highest bidder too. Go check the voting numbers on SOPA/PIPA.

  • Gaia Song

    Let’a call on the hackers of the world to unite and release to the public all of the browsing histories of every representative and every senator in the U.S. Congress who voted to pass these grossly unconstitutional bills– S.J. Res. 34 and H.I. Res. 86– bills, which violate citizens rights to privacy, as guaranteed by the 4th Amendment to the Constitution. This is capitalism taken to yet another sickening extreme.