119-HR-7215 Journalist Public Summary

Headline Summary

A bipartisan proposal to get federal agencies on the same page about scams—defining them the same way, collecting the same data, and publicly reporting how many people are hurt and how much money is lost each year.

What It Does

The bill tells the FBI Director—working with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), and other agencies—to create a government‑wide strategy against scams. Within one year of becoming law, they must adopt a single definition of “scam,” agree on common scam categories, and harmonize the data agencies collect (like scam type, dollar loss, and payment method). Within two years, they must publish one nationwide estimate of how many consumers are affected (including unreported incidents) and the total losses. It also requires the FBI, CFPB, and FTC to report their own complaint and loss estimates yearly and to set metrics that show whether their in‑person and webinar trainings are actually working.

Why It Matters

• People and businesses face a confusing mix of scam warnings and reporting systems; a unified strategy and common language could make prevention advice clearer and reporting easier.
• Standardized data would let policymakers and law enforcement see the full picture—what scams are rising, how they’re paid for, and where to target resources.
• Public estimates of victims and losses add transparency and help communities, banks, tech firms, and nonprofits align efforts.

Who’s For It

• Lead sponsors: Rep. Josh Harder (D‑CA) and Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R‑PA), signaling bipartisan interest in coordinated anti‑scam efforts.
• Likely allies: agencies and community groups that run scam‑prevention trainings, which could benefit from shared definitions and clearer metrics. (Formal endorsements not yet noted at introduction.)

Who’s Against It

• No formal opposition noted at introduction.
• Potential concerns observers may raise:
• • Overlap with existing task forces or databases could add bureaucracy if not streamlined.
• • Broad or inflexible definitions of “scam” might sweep in legitimate activity or chill innovation if misapplied.
• • Expanded data collection may raise privacy and data‑security questions if not carefully safeguarded.
• • Focusing on training metrics may not capture real‑world outcomes like money recovered or prosecutions.

What’s Next

As of January 22, 2026, the bill was introduced in the House and referred to the Judiciary, Energy and Commerce, and Financial Services Committees. Next steps: committee consideration, possible amendments, and votes; if it passes the House, it must also pass the Senate and then be signed by the President to become law.