H.Con.Res. 102: Expressing the sense of Congress that it is the duty of the Federal Government to establish a new royalty program to provide income to featured and non-featured performing artists whose music or audio content is listened to on streaming music services, like Spotify.
Before you vote › Federal bills
H.Con.Res. 102: Expressing the sense of Congress that it is the duty of the Federal Government to establish a new royalty program to provide income to featured and non-featured performing artists whose music or audio content is listened to on streaming music services, like Spotify.
117th Congress · introduced 2022-08-09 · Arts, Culture, Religion · Latest: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
federal
Follow this bill, step by step
- Where it came from: introduced 2022-08-09 · official record
- Who proposed it: Rep. Tlaib, Rashida [D-MI-13] · what a sponsor is
- What happened next: no floor votes in our records yet. Why?
- Where it stands now: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary. Not final yet: this can still change. We check for updates every day.
- If it becomes law and spends money: follow the money to money laws, then agencies and contracts and grants.
Official title
Expressing the sense of Congress that it is the duty of the Federal Government to establish a new royalty program to provide income to featured and non-featured performing artists whose music or audio content is listened to on streaming music services, like Spotify.
Plain summary
This concurrent resolution expresses the sense of Congress that it is the duty of the federal government to establish a new statutory royalty program that provides musicians whose recorded work is listened to on streaming music services reasonable remuneration through a royalty payment earned on a per-stream basis, ensures streaming music services compensate musicians at fair rates that are not significantly lower than rates earned on traditional physical record sales, and avoids falling behind in investing in musicians within the United States compared to other countries that have already proposed legislation to address inequalities in the music industry. The concurrent resolution also expresses that such statutory royalty program should be administered by SoundExchange and the Copyright Royalty Board, who will together calculate, collect, retain, and distribute the royalty payments to all eligible musicians whose recorded work is listened to on streaming music services; and funded by mandatory pro rata contributions collected by SoundExchange from eligible providers of music-streaming service with the option for SoundExchange to request additional direct public funding.
Congressional Research Service summary (Introduced in House), quoted unchanged (nonpartisan). Read the source.
What a vote does
A “Yea” vote
A Yea supports adopting this resolution.
A “Nay” vote
If it is not passed, current law stays as it is.
PSI Sci description of the legislative step (not an opinion).
What does this mean? (plain words)
Official text
Expressing the sense of Congress that it is the duty of the Federal Government to establish a new royalty program to provide income to featured and non-featured performing artists whose music or audio content is listened to on streaming music services, like Spotify.
Source: Congressional Research Service summary (Introduced in House)
AI explanation – may be wrong, check the official text
No AI explanation yet. It takes up to a minute to write and is then saved for everyone.
Limited to a few requests an hour per person.
The strongest published arguments
Arguments for (supporters)
Needs sources: no published arguments on this side yet. We only show items backed by a published source. Suggest one.
Arguments against (opponents)
Needs sources: no published arguments on this side yet. We only show items backed by a published source. Suggest one.
Alternatives
Needs sources: no published alternatives yet (for example a different bill, a law instead of an amendment, or keeping current law). We only show items backed by a published source. Suggest one.
How did my representative vote? · This bill's floor votes
Officials and money
Sponsor: Rep. Tlaib, Rashida [D-MI-13] · 2 cosponsors
Cost estimate: No cost estimate published yet.
Cosponsors on this site
André Carson (D-IN)
Sponsor's campaign money: Rep. Tlaib, Rashida [D-MI-13] reported raising $3.3 million (2025–2026). Details. Shown for context only; it does not mean any donor supported this bill.
No linked floor roll calls in our collected records yet. This does not mean the bill has never had a vote. Check the official bill history.
Words on this page, explained (3)
- Resolution
- A formal statement or decision by a legislative body. Simple resolutions often only express an opinion or set rules for one chamber; they do not become law.
- Roll-call vote
- A vote where each member's position is recorded by name, so the public can see how every member voted. "Yea" means yes, "Nay" means no, "Present" means the member was there but did not take a side.
- Statute
- A written law passed by a legislature. A statute can be changed by a later law; changing a constitution needs an amendment.
Plain meanings written from linked sources. All words.
Sources
- Congressional Research Service summary (Introduced in House)
- Congress.gov
- Data: GovInfo BILLSTATUS bulk data (Library of Congress), BILLSTATUS-117hconres102.xml <https://www.govinfo.gov/bulkdata/BILLSTATUS/117/hconres>
Record fed-us-cong117-hconres102 · catalog fed-us-congress-bills-cong117 · updated 2026-11-15 by psicol fed-bills-cong117