WASHINGTON - Today, Vice Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Mark R. Warner (D-VA) and House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence Ranking Member Jim Himes (D-CT-04) wrote to Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard regarding her participation in the FBI’s execution of a search warrant at the Fulton County Election Hub and Operations Center. 

"In the year since your confirmation as Director of National Intelligence, you have puzzlingly sought to dismantle elements of the Intelligence Community organized to identify, assess, and counter foreign threats to U.S. elections," the lawmakers wrote. "This has included dismantling the Foreign Malign Influence Center, the product of bipartisan legislation in 2019; declassifying a range of classified materials associated with the 2016 Presidential Election – in an apparent attempt to rewrite the well-established public record generated by the Special Counsel Investigation and the bipartisan Senate Select Committee on Intelligence investigation; and paralyzing intelligence production on foreign plans and intentions towards future U.S. elections. In parallel, the Attorney General and Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation have dissolved the Foreign Influence Task Force, which was established under President Trump’s first term. 

"It is also deeply concerning that you participated in this domestic law enforcement action. The Intelligence Community should be focused on foreign threats and, as you yourself have testified, when those intelligence authorities are turned inwards the results can be devastating for Americans privacy and civil liberties.”

The lawmakers concluded, "Given the politically fraught nature of elections for federal office, any federal efforts associated with combatting foreign election threats necessitate public transparency, prompt updating of Congressional intelligence committees, and clear commitment to non-partisan conduct. Your recent actions raise foundational questions about the current mission of your office, and it is critical that you brief the Committees immediately as part of your obligation to keep Congress fully and currently informed.”

The full text of the letter is available here.

WASHINGTON – Today, U.S. Sen. Mark R. Warner joined 11 of his Senate colleagues in urging the Trump Administration’s Office of Personnel Management (OPM) against implementing a rule that would severely weaken longstanding civil service protections for federal probationary employees.

In their letter submitted for OPM’s official comment period on its proposed rule regarding probationary and trial period appeals, the Senators expressed concern that the rule would shift the adjudication of termination appeals from the independent Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) to an internal OPM process overseen by a political appointee – a clear conflict of interest in which OPM could both decide which employees are fired and play referee in disputes over those firings. Further, they noted that eroding already limited protections for probationary employees and inviting political interference in workforce matters will harm the recruitment and retention of top talent in the federal civil service. The Senators stressed that these proposed changes are especially dangerous given the Administration’s recent abuses of probationary employees, including mass firings conducted last year that were deemed illegal by a federal court – and they urged OPM to reject the rule and work with Congress to protect a merit-based, nonpartisan federal workforce.

Joining Sen. Warner on this letter are Sens. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Patty Murray (D-WA), Ron Wyden (D-OR), Michael Bennet (D-CO), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Tim Kaine (D-VA), Edward Markey (D-MA), Gary Peters (D-MI), Alex Padilla (D-CA), Andy Kim, (D-NJ), and Angela Alsobrooks (D-MD).

“We write in strong opposition to the Office of Personnel Management’s (OPM) Proposed Rule – Streamlining Probationary and Trial Period Appeals,” the senators began. “Probationary employees, mostly in the competitive service, long had narrow, but critical, appeal rights to the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB). These protections covering discrimination based on partisan political reasons or marital status, and terminations based on conditions arising prior to federal employment were already limited in scope and difficult to prove. However, the proposed rule would harm probationary employees by replacing an independent MSPB review with an internal OPM process overseen by a political appointee, eliminating judicial review, eroding civil service protections and merit system principles, and impacting the recruiting of top talent for the federal workforce.”

“Congress intentionally sought to prevent precisely the outcome where the agency that sets personnel policy also adjudicates claims that those policies are being applied incorrectly or unlawfully. This proposed rule runs directly contrary to that framework, effectively recreating parts of a discredited system that Congress intentionally abandoned,” they continued. “Under this proposed rule, OPM could direct agencies to make probationary terminations and then adjudicate those same actions, eliminating any meaningful independence.”

“As members of Congress, we have seen the critical services that the nonpartisan, highly skilled federal workforce provides to the American public. We must ensure that the civil service is insulated from political retaliation and has a right to due process all while hiring and retaining top talent. This rule is antithetical to those aims. We urge OPM to reject this proposed rule and work with Congress to effectively manage workforce operations,” the senators concluded.

Text of the letter can be viewed here and below.

Dear Director Kupor,

We write in strong opposition to the Office of Personnel Management’s (OPM) Proposed Rule – Streamlining Probationary and Trial Period Appeals [OPM-2025-0013]. The proposed rule seeks to restructure the process by which certain employees who are terminated during their probationary periods appeal these decisions. Probationary employees, mostly in the competitive service, long had narrow, but critical, appeal rights to the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB). These protections covering discrimination based on partisan political reasons or marital status, and terminations based on conditions arising prior to federal employment were already limited in scope and difficult to prove. However, the proposed rule would harm probationary employees by replacing an independent MSPB review with an internal OPM process overseen by a political appointee, eliminating judicial review, eroding civil service protections and merit system principles, and impacting the recruiting of top talent for the federal workforce.

The Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 split the former Civil Service Commission into distinct agencies with distinct missions. Relevant here, it assigned personnel policy making to OPM and adjudication of workforce appeals to the MSPB. Congress intentionally sought to prevent precisely the outcome where the agency that sets personnel policy also adjudicates claims that those policies are being applied incorrectly or unlawfully. This proposed rule runs directly contrary to that framework, effectively recreating parts of a discredited system that Congress intentionally abandoned.

The rule seeks to move the appeals adjudication to OPM’s Merit System Accountability and Compliance (MSAC). However, the MSPB has the experience, precedents, and procedures to review these probationary employee appeals that MSAC does not have. MSAC lacks the balanced governing board of the MSPB, reports directly to the OPM Director, and has no demonstrated capacity to handle a surge in these types of appeals. Through MSPB review, there is a prudent separation between the agency setting personnel policy and the agency deciding if these policies are being applied lawfully. Under this proposed rule, OPM could direct agencies to make probationary terminations and then adjudicate those same actions, eliminating any meaningful independence.

This conflict of interest is not hypothetical. While federal civil servants across the country give their talent, expertise, and dedication to serve the American public by providing critical services, the Trump administration has already demonstrated its desire to politicize the federal workforce, even taking illegal actions against probationary employees. As part of their dismantling of the federal workforce, the administration sent letters to probationary employees that cruelly and wrongly claimed they were fired for subpar performance at the direction of OPM. Recognizing the unlawfulness of these actions, a federal court ruled that the Trump administration illegally fired roughly 25,000 federal probationary employees. These actions underscore how probationary status has been abused in practice by an administration willing to weaponize personnel processes for political ends.

In light of this demonstrated pattern of unjust and illegal treatment of probationary employees, this proposed rule is especially dangerous to civil service protections, as it eliminates requirements for hearings and discovery during the appeals process that would be typical at the MSPB. Partisan political discrimination cases frequently rely on nuanced motive, credibility, and informal communications. This evidence cannot be meaningfully assessed without discovery or witness testimony. Without access to evidence or a neutral factfinder, the burden placed on employees becomes effectively insurmountable. Under this proposal, appeals would be limited to a paper-only, agency-controlled record, with hearings provided only if OPM deems them “necessary.” As a result, this structure makes such claims nearly impossible to prove and, in practice, could amount to a sham review process. In a worst-case scenario, an administration could rely on external indicators—such as voter registration data or political activity—to justify removals, while denying employees any meaningful opportunity to challenge those decisions so long as discriminatory motives or reasons for termination were not explicit.

Additionally, the American public deserves a merit-based, nonpartisan civil service that recruits and retains the best talent across the nation. The administration has called for the recruitment of top scientific and technical expertise in the federal government. However, talented prospective employees become less likely to join a workforce where political influence and diminished due process create instability and risk. Recent mass firings including highly skilled employees in AI and technical fields with strong performance records have already caused significant reputational harm to the federal government’s brand as an employer, signaling to prospective recruits that even excellent performance offers no protection. The proposed rule and the administration’s attack on the civil service undermines its ability to keep and hire top talent by building uncertainty for new employees and creating less flexibility for managers.

As members of Congress, we have seen the critical services that the nonpartisan, highly skilled federal workforce provides to the American public. We must ensure that the civil service is insulated from political retaliation and has a right to due process all while hiring and retaining top talent. This rule is antithetical to those aims. We urge OPM to reject this proposed rule and work with Congress to effectively manage workforce operations.

###

WASHINGTON – U.S. Sens. Mark R. Warner and Tim Kaine (both D-VA) released the below statement on a National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) hearing announcing the agency’s findings from its year-long investigation into the deadly midair collision near Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport (DCA) that took the lives of 67 people:

“We thank NTSB Chair Jennifer Homendy, Board Member Inman, the other members of the Board, and the investigators and staff at the National Transportation Safety Board for their thorough and tireless work to uncover the truth about what happened on January 29, 2025. The conclusions announced at today’s hearing are sobering and underscore just how preventable this tragedy was. An overstretched system, overwhelmed air traffic controllers, an overreliance on pilots to maintain separation in one of the most complex airspaces in the country, and the Federal Aviation Administration’s failure to act on safety recommendations all contributed to a disaster that should never have occurred.

“The NTSB’s work will make our airspace safer — but only if Congress and the FAA act on these findings. We remain fully committed to making DCA, every airport in Virginia, and airports across the country as safe as possible. In December, the Senate passed the bipartisan ROTOR Act, which addresses several of the systemic issues implicated in this incident. We call on the House to swiftly pass the ROTOR Act, on the administration to faithfully implement it, and on Congress to continue taking proactive steps to make air travel safer.

“Congress will also soon have the opportunity to dig into the NTSB’s report, as well as two additional reports from the Army, regarding this crash. We will do everything in our power to ensure that these investigations lead to additional, comprehensive steps to enhance safety for the flying public. It is obvious that those steps must include removing slots from DCA. For years, we have warned that continually squeezing more flights into an already constrained airspace and an airport with the busiest runway in America carries serious safety risks. Today’s findings confirm those concerns in the most painful way possible. We owe it to the 67 lives lost, to their families, and to everyone who flies in and out of DCA to learn from this tragedy and to act decisively.”

###

* High-quality photographs of Sen. Mark R. Warner are available for download here *

Photos may be used online and in print, and can be attributed to ‘The Office of Sen. Mark R. Warner’

WASHINGTON – Today, U.S. Sens. Mark R. Warner and Tim Kaine (both D-VA) released the following statement regarding Attorney General Pam Bondi’s announcement that Lindsey Halligan—whom a federal judge ruled was unlawfully appointed to her position—was leaving the Eastern District of Virginia (EDVA):

“Virginia Senators of both parties have always worked closely with presidential Administrations, regardless of party, on Virginia nominations. That fair and deliberate process has always included at least one meeting with the nominees to discuss their qualifications—until now. It has been over 16 weeks since the Trump Administration nominated Lindsey Halligan, but neither she nor the White House ever reached out to meet with us or even introduce herself. It’s clear this Administration never expected her to be confirmed by the Senate given her lack of qualifications to serve as a U.S. Attorney, and instead wanted to end-run around the Senate and the Judiciary Committee.”

On January 21, 2025, the Trump Administration appointed Erik Siebert as the interim U.S. Attorney for the EDVA. In April of 2025, after an extensive interview process that included the input of a bipartisan panel of former Virginia U.S. Attorneys and other well-respected members of the Virginia legal community, Warner and Kaine sent a letter to the White House recommending Siebert for the U.S. Attorney position. In May of 2025, the White House announced that Siebert was formally nominated for the role. Siebert was serving in an interim capacity because he had not yet been confirmed by the U.S. Senate. On May 9, 2025, the District Judges of the Eastern District of Virginia unanimously voted for Seibert to continue as the interim U.S. Attorney. 

###

WASHINGTON – U.S. Sens. Mark R. Warner and Tim Kaine (both D-VA) introduced legislation today to rename a Sterling, Va. post office as the “Firefighter Trevor Brown Post Office Building.” This legislation honors the service of Firefighter Trevor Brown – a husband, father of three, and youth soccer and baseball coach who lost his life in the line of duty on February 16, 2024, while investigating reports of a gas leak that resulted in a catastrophic explosion as firefighters began their investigation.

“Trevor Brown was a heroic firefighter who spent his career running towards danger in an effort to save lives and protect members of his own community. It is an honor to introduce this legislation to rename a Sterling, Va. post office in his honor and in remembrance of his courage, bravery, and service through the Sterling Volunteer Fire Company,” said the senators. 

This bill was also introduced in the House of Representatives by U.S. Rep. Suhas Subramanyam (D-VA) and the Virginia congressional delegation. The United States Postal Service (USPS) facility is located at 46164 Westlake Drive in Sterling, Virginia.

Full text of this legislation is available here.

###

* High-quality photographs of Sen. Mark R. Warner are available for download here *

Photos may be used online and in print, and can be attributed to ‘The Office of Sen. Mark R. Warner’

WASHINGTON – U.S. Sen. Mark R. Warner (D-VA), released the following statement after Senate Republicans blocked passage of a Congressional Review Act (CRA) resolution to overturn a Trump administration rule that would raise health care costs and make it harder for Americans to access coverage through the Affordable Care Act (ACA) marketplaces:

“Today’s vote is the latest chapter in a years-long effort by Republicans to undermine the Affordable Care Act and make health care more expensive and harder to access for American families. By blocking this CRA resolution, Republicans gave the Trump administration rule a green light to raise premiums, increase out-of-pocket costs, add burdensome paperwork, and push as many as 1.8 million Americans off their health insurance.

“This vote follows a series of deliberate Republican actions that have already driven up health care costs. Just weeks ago, Republicans refused to extend the ACA enhanced premium tax credits, driving premium increases of hundreds, and in some cases thousands, of dollars a month for families who were already stretched thin. They’ve backed cuts to Medicaid, undermined marketplace stability, and now they’ve doubled down by letting this harmful rule stand. Taken together, these actions threaten both coverage and affordability for millions of Americans, deepening a health care crisis that never should have happened.

“This vote was a chance to do the bare minimum – to stop a rule so harmful that it’s already been paused by the courts – and Republicans still said no. I’ll continue fighting to protect affordable health care and to hold this administration accountable for policies that hurt working families.”

The Congressional Review Act (CRA) allows Congress to overturn recently finalized federal rules within a specified timeframe. Today’s resolution, introduced by Sens. Warner, Ron Wyden (D-OR), Jon Ossoff (D-GA), and 40 other Senate Democrats, sought to nullify a Trump administration rule issued by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) on June 25, 2025. The so-called “Marketplace Integrity and Affordability” rule would make it harder for Americans to enroll in ACA marketplace plans, reduce covered services, increase premiums and out-of-pocket costs, and impose new bureaucratic hurdles on families and states. CMS projects that if implemented, up to 1.8 million people could lose coverage next year, while millions of others would face higher costs and increased administrative burdens.

Repealing the rule through the CRA would have prevented CMS from issuing a substantially similar policy in the future, protecting more than 22 million Americans who rely on the ACA marketplaces for affordable health insurance. Despite strong Democratic support, Senate Republicans blocked the resolution, allowing the rule to remain in effect.

Prior to the vote, Sen. Warner spoke on the floor, urging his Republican colleagues to support his legislation to protect Americans’ health care. Full video of those remarks is available for download here.

 ###

* High-quality photographs of Sen. Mark R. Warner are available for download here *

Photos may be used online and in print, and can be attributed to ‘The Office of Sen. Mark R. Warner’

WASHINGTON – Today, U.S. Sen. Mark R. Warner (D-VA) issued the statement below after the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)’s Office of the Inspector General (OIG) announced a new audit to evaluate the processes that DHS law enforcement personnel follow to prevent the arrest of U.S. citizens during immigration enforcement operations.

“As immigration enforcement officers continue to flood American neighborhoods, I’m cautiously optimistic to see DHS’s Inspector General take a hard look at how U.S. citizens are treated during the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement operations. Too often, bystander videos show U.S. citizens and non-citizens swept up in the increasingly aggressive and dangerous enforcement actions of immigration officers who, in some cases, have denied individuals the opportunity to prove their citizenship or legal immigration status. These instances infringe on the constitutional rights of U.S. citizens and non-citizens alike, and increasingly result in damage to property, injuries, trauma, and death. Now more than ever, as immigration enforcement officers continue to hide their own identities while demanding proof of citizenship from their fellow countrymen and women, the American people deserve to know about the practices and policies that govern these interactions. I’ll be closely following this investigation, including to monitor for its independence and non-partisanship.”

This OIG audit follows strong advocacy by Sen. Warner, who last year pushed the DHS Inspector General to launch an investigation into the Department’s stops, arrests, detentions, and deportations of U.S. citizens, and demanded greater clarity from the Trump administration after a U.S. citizen and Virginia resident was handcuffed and detained despite attempting to prove his citizenship status.

###

* High-quality photographs of Sen. Mark R. Warner are available for download here *

Photos may be used online and in print, and can be attributed to ‘The Office of Sen. Mark R. Warner’

WASHINGTON – U.S. Sen. Mark R. Warner (D-VA), a senior member of the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs, released the following statement:

“The Fed was designed to operate independently, insulated from political pressure, so that it can make tough decisions based on data and the long-term health of the economy, not the whims of any one president. That independence provides the stability that markets, investors, and everyday Americans rely on. Using the threat of criminal prosecution to pressure the Fed over interest rates is a direct assault on that foundation and puts the economic security of millions of Americans at risk. Uncertainty and instability can ripple through the economy, affecting borrowing costs and making it harder for families to buy a home, run a small business, or afford everyday necessities like food, fuel, and diapers.

“Unfortunately, we have seen this pattern before. Over the past year, the Justice Department has repeatedly targeted the president’s perceived political adversaries, only to have courts and grand juries reject these cases as baseless and politically motivated. We have also seen the president attempt to remove a sitting Federal Reserve Board member, underscoring his willingness to attack the Fed for refusing to fall in line.

“The administration’s latest attacks on Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell are just the most recent example of Donald Trump’s chaos-driven approach to the economy – and once again, it’s working Americans who will pay the price. From impulsive trade wars and erratic tariffs to deficit-exploding tax cuts and attacks on Fed independence, President Trump has shown time and again that he’s more interested in political theater than helping the American people. The result is higher costs for families, uncertainty for businesses, and diminished confidence in our economic leadership around the world.” 

###

WASHINGTON – U.S. Sen. Mark R. Warner (D-VA), Vice Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, issued the following statement:

“Our Constitution places the gravest decisions about the use of military force in the hands of Congress for a reason. Using military force to enact regime change demands the closest scrutiny, precisely because the consequences do not end with the initial strike.

“If the United States asserts the right to use military force to invade and capture foreign leaders it accuses of criminal conduct, what prevents China from claiming the same authority over Taiwan’s leadership? What stops Vladimir Putin from asserting similar justification to abduct Ukraine’s president? Once this line is crossed, the rules that restrain global chaos begin to collapse, and authoritarian regimes will be the first to exploit it.

“None of this absolves Maduro. He is a corrupt authoritarian who has repressed his people, stolen elections, imprisoned political opponents, and presided over a humanitarian catastrophe that has forced millions of Venezuelans to flee. The Venezuelan people deserve democratic leadership, and the United States and the international community should have done far more, years ago, to press for a peaceful transition after Maduro lost a vote of his own citizens. But recognizing Maduro’s crimes does not give any president the authority to ignore the Constitution.

“The hypocrisy underlying this decision is especially glaring. This same president recently pardoned former Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernández, who was convicted in a U.S. court on serious drug trafficking charges, including conspiring with narcotics traffickers while in office. Yet now, the administration claims that similar allegations justify the use of military force against another sovereign nation. You cannot credibly argue that drug trafficking charges demand invasion in one case, while issuing a pardon in another.

“America’s strength comes from our commitment to the rule of law, democratic norms, and constitutional restraint. When we abandon those principles, even in the name of confronting bad actors, we weaken our credibility, endanger global stability, and invite abuses of power that will long outlast any single presidency.” 

###

Today, U.S. Sen. Mark R. Warner (D-VA) released the following statement after the Trump administration released only part of the Epstein files:

“Under the law, Donald Trump had 30 days to release all of the Epstein files. Today marks day 30. Where are the full Epstein files?”

WASHINGTON – U.S. Sens. Mark R. Warner and Tim Kaine (both D-VA) introduced the Relief for Survivors of Miners Act, legislation that would remove barriers to benefits and ensure that families of miners who have died from black lung are properly compensated. A companion bill was introduced by Rep. Morgan McGarvey (D-KY-03) in the U.S. House of Representatives.

“Grieving families in Virginia’s mining communities shouldn’t have to worry about fighting red tape or taking on hefty financial burdens,” said Sen. Warner. “I’m proud to stand alongside Rep. McGarvey and reintroduce the Relief for Survivors of Miners Act, which will ensure that families struggling with the loss of a loved one receive the benefits they deserve.”

“Miners take on enormous burdens to power our communities, and it’s unacceptable that many families of deceased miners are struggling to access their benefits,” said Sen. Kaine. “These families deserve our care and support, which is why we’re introducing this bill to cut red tape and make it easier for them to secure critical resources they need.”

“When families are navigating the grief of losing a loved one and the financial worries that come with it, they shouldn’t be subjected to a lengthy and expensive legal process just to prove what we already know: miners work in dangerous conditions to power this country and pay for it with their own health and lives,” said Rep. McGarvey. “The burden should be on the coal companies, not grieving widows, to either prove there’s no connection to black lung or pay these families what they’re owed as a small step towards addressing the irreparable harm miners endured on the job. I’m grateful to Senator Warner for staying in this fight and doing everything we can to make it easier for these families to get the benefits they’ve more than earned.”

Specifically, the Relief for Survivors of Miners Act would:  

• Re-establish a pre-1981 “rebuttable presumption” that a miner who died from respiratory-related conditions had died due to black lung if the miner was previously disabled due to black lung.
• Improve legal representation by paying attorneys’ fees and medical expenses incurred during the claims process.

• Request a Government Accountability Office report on the financial impact of these payments and other ways to improve the claims process and benefits for survivors.

Research has shown that repeated exposure to coal dust and other materials puts miners at risk of developing black lung disease. Inhaling dust scars the lungs, impairs breathing, and other respiratory complications that can have life-altering consequences and lead to disability and death.

Under current law, miners’ surviving dependents can claim monthly payments and medical benefits through the Black Lung Benefits Act of 1972, but must prove black lung substantially contributed to the miner’s death, even if the miner was diagnosed with black lung and died of respiratory illness, imposing a heavy legal and financial burden on survivors’ families who lack the resources of mine operators and their lawyers.

The bill text can be found here.

###

* High-quality photographs of Sen. Mark R. Warner are available for download here *

Photos may be used online and in print, and can be attributed to ‘The Office of Sen. Mark R. Warner’

WASHINGTON – Today, in the thick of the holiday shopping season, U.S. Sen. Mark R. Warner (D-VA) led Sens. Ruben Gallego (D-AZ), Richard Blumental (D-CT), and Josh Hawley (R-MO) in pushing the Trump administration to crack down on surveillance pricing, which eliminates a fixed or static price in favor of prices that are specially tailored to an individual consumer’s willingness to pay. As part of this letter, the senators highlight a 2024 Federal Trade Commission (FTC) study that found companies used “a wide range of personal data to set individualized consumer prices.” That study was shut down by FTC chair Andrew Ferguson, who cancelled the public comment period, effectively ending the study in January.

“As the FTC has documented, businesses are increasingly using personal data, such as demographic information, precise location, or even web browsing history, to target individual consumers with different prices for the same goods and services. Surveillance pricing builds upon not only the data that a company holds on a prospective customer, but also data purchased from shady data brokers,” wrote the senators. “Recent concerns about surveillance pricing for airline tickets illustrate the dangers of this highly intrusive – and for consumers financially burdensome – practice. Fetcherr, an A.I. analytics company, suggested it was developing pricing algorithms for airlines that would target individuals with specific prices that consider “factors like customer lifetime value, past purchase behaviors, and the real-time context of each booking inquiry” to drive up revenue.”

As part of this letter, the senators highlighted the Biden-era FTC study, which examined how companies tracked consumer behaviors – including a person’s precise location, browser history, and even mouse movements on a webpage – to inform their surveillance pricing tactics.

“The Commission had already begun a comprehensive market investigation into surveillance pricing under its Section 6(b) authority and issued a preliminary staff report on its findings. The 6(b) study explored the use cases and industries in which surveillance pricing is occurring and has helped reveal some of the details of this opaque business,” the senators continued. “The FTC found within its requests at least 250 businesses including grocery stores, apparel retailers, health and beauty retailers, home goods and furnishing stores, convenience stores, and hardware stores had adopted surveillance pricing strategies. Consumers deserve a fair playing field, where they’re not at the mercy of amorphous data brokers capturing their data and using it to determine their maximum financial pain point for a good or service. We urge the Commission to publish its Section 6(b) study on surveillance pricing and then take rulemaking and enforcement actions to reign in this exploitative practice.”

This effort follows strong leadership from Sens. Warner, Gallego and Blumenthal, who earlier this year demanded answers from Delta Air Lines CEO Ed Bastian after the company announced its plans to ramp up use of Artificial Intelligence to set surveillance-based ticket prices.

The full text of the letter is available here and below:

The Honorable Andrew N. Ferguson

Chairman

Federal Trade Commission

600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20580

Dear Chairman Ferguson:

We write to express our concern with the practice of “surveillance pricing” and to urge the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC” or “Commission”) to crack down on the increasingly common practice of companies using personal information to raise prices for consumers. We call on the Commission to re-open its market investigation into surveillance pricing and to take appropriate steps to protect consumers, including enforcement actions and rulemakings. 

As the FTC has documented, businesses are increasingly using personal data, such as demographic information, precise location, or even web browsing history, to target individual consumers with different prices for the same goods and services. Surveillance pricing builds upon not only the data that a company holds on a prospective customer, but also data purchased from shady data brokers. The practice of surveillance pricing has also given rise to new tech companies that claim to use “advanced algorithms, artificial intelligence and other technologies with personal information about consumers ... to categorize individuals and set a targeted price for a product or service” – sophisticated specialists in raising costs on consumers.

Recent concerns about surveillance pricing for airline tickets illustrate the dangers of this highly intrusive — and for consumers financially burdensome — practice. Fetcherr, an A.I. analytics company, suggested it was developing pricing algorithms for airlines that would target individuals with specific prices that consider “factors like customer lifetime value, past purchase behaviors, and the real-time context of each booking inquiry” to drive up revenue. Taken together, airlines could find each consumers pain point and extract the most revenue, taking advantage of urgent trips. These concerns build on existing anxieties about airlines using dynamic pricing. Moreover Fetcherr’s ambitions to “[expand] into new verticals like hotels, cargo logistics, and even finance” illustrates the growth of this practice.

The Commission had already begun a comprehensive market investigation into surveillance pricing under its Section 6(b) authority and issued a preliminary staff report on its findings. The 6(b) study explored the use cases and industries in which surveillance pricing is occurring and has helped reveal some of the details of this opaque business. The FTC found within its requests at least 250 businesses including grocery stores, apparel retailers, health and beauty retailers, home goods and furnishing stores, convenience stores, and hardware stores had adopted surveillance pricing strategies. Consumers deserve a fair playing field, where they’re not at the mercy of amorphous data brokers capturing their data and using it to determine their maximum financial pain point for a good or service.

We urge the Commission to publish its Section 6(b) study on surveillance pricing and then take rulemaking and enforcement actions to reign in this exploitative practice

Sincerely,